I have a lot of bad habits. One of my bad habits is using flowery, indirect language. Here’s an example that especially makes me feel like shit:
It kind of shows that what we conceive as"rhythm" is not one dimensional--as in points representing triggers on a line representing time--but extends into the dimensions of tone, volume, timbre, etc.
This makes me think “yuck.” All of the highlighted words are redundant or unnecessary in some other way, and the green words straight-up give me disquiet. Here’s a better version of the sentence:
It shows that rhythms are more than points on timelines.
To my ear, this is as good as this sentence can be without becoming a different sentence. But it stinks nonetheless. It seems vague and dishonest. Here’s an honest revision of the idea:
[The music of the Ikue Mori Pandora station] is characterized by unusual changes in timbre and pitch. It achieves this in part because it uses weird sounds. In a loose analogical sense, there are rhythm-like patterns in the changes in timbre and pitch in this music. What I mean is if you plotted the changes in these values somehow, the graph would somehow be isomorphic to the graph of a somehow-plotted rhythm. This makes me wonder if all music is fundamentally rhythm-based. If I’m being honest, the sentence before this one is, almost word for word, something I said to a coworker one time and thought sounded cool and somewhat feasible. A few minutes after I said it, I thought about it for approximately thirty seconds. I’ve thought about it maybe six times, thirty-seconds each time, since. Now that I think of it, it’s a poor idea.
Which seems almost right, but I noticed that I didn’t express something properly:
This makes me wonder if all [parts of] music is are fundamentally rhythm-based rhythmic.
But I hate the consonance of “music” and “rhythmic” so I’ll quit writing forever.
My most frequently listened-to Pandora stations and my reasons for listening to them:
Ikue Mori: this music makes me feel cool in an artsy-sophisticated-fringy way. It kind of shows that what we conceive as "rhythm" is not one dimensional--as in points representing triggers on a line representing time--but extends into the dimensions of tone, volume, timbre, etc. I think of these as the tonal dimensions, and I think rhythm is very important.
Noveller: this music makes me feel cool in an artsy-sexy-lonely way. It is similar to the music of the Ikue Mori station but with more of an emphasis on spaces and emotional states. I think space is very important. In my view, space and the tonal dimensions constitute the "creative" or "art" or "generative" or "mystical" field.
Charles Mingus: this music makes me feel cool in a artsy-rebellious-intellectual way. Jazz after Charlie Parker (approximately 1940 to the present) emphasizes the performance nature of music. Even the compositions of this period feel as though they were performed onto paper. I think performance is very important because it is, in my view, the way in which we engage "creation" or "art" or "generation" or "the mystical."
Separate names with a comma.