<html>

<head>
<title>Tony Conrad</title>
</head>

<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div align="center"><center>

<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="486">
  <tr>
    <td><p align="center"><img src="volumemast.gif" width="339" height="57"> </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td valign="top"><p align="center">&nbsp; <img src="generic.jpg" align="right" width="200"
    height="250"></p>
    <p align="center"><font face="Arial" size="3"><b>Tony Conrad<br>
    </b></font><font face="Arial" size="2"></font></p>
    <p align="left"><font face="Arial" size="2">Tony Conrad (b. 1940) was among the earliest
    &quot;minimal&quot; composer/performers; his &quot;Day of Niagara&quot; (1965, with John
    Cale, Angus MacLise, La Monte Young, and Marian Zazeela) is at last being released this
    summer. He was also among the first &quot;structural&quot; filmmakers (&quot;The
    Flicker&quot;, 1966). He has exhibited widely in video, film, sound, and performance, and
    teaches in the Department of Media Study at SUNY Buffalo.<em><br>
    <br>
    THE CLANDESTINE NAUTICAL CARNALITY OF SHORT I<br>
    The idea that musical harmony and scales are the mysterious product of a hidden
    mathematical order in the cosmos has served the pompous and invidious interests of
    idealists, priests, scientists, and the ruling elite since the time of Pythagoras. In all
    honesty, there are indeed specific number ratios that accompany the pitches in the scale,
    but these relationships are not founded in-and-of Number, any more than our ten fingers
    and ten toes. -- If the connection between music and Number is incidental, then where does
    our fascination with the particular notes of the scale arise? The answer should be (and
    is) obvious; its invisibility today is the product of our cultural conditioning by 2500
    years of exposure to the Western idealist tradition of music theory. That it will be
    difficult for me now to describe the way music depends on speech is only an indication of
    how thicketed music has become, overlain as it is with a tangled underbrush of
    instrumental technologies, numerical calculations, and invocations of divine guidance. --
    People's fascination with the pitches of the scale is actually a product of the most
    subtle and valuable auditory perception humans possess - our unique capacity to hear and
    decipher spoken language. When you talk to your dog or cat, you see that consonants are
    pretty easy for them to follow. &quot;Sssss!&quot; is very different from
    &quot;mmmmmmm,&quot; for example. But our human ability to understand the subtle
    differences among the various vowel sounds goes way beyond the hearing discrimination of
    more than a bare handful of other species. We easily follow minute and very rapid vowel
    fluctuations, too, as in diphthong sounds such as &quot;ear.&quot; -- All of the
    &quot;voiced&quot; sounds of speech, among which the vowels are paradigmatic, are powered
    by a rude flapping of the vocal cords in the larynx. The sound the vocal cords make has a
    very irregular waveform with an extremely high content of upper harmonics. When we speak,
    we use the two resonant cavities of the throat and nose to &quot;filter&quot; this
    waveform so as to produce each of the needed vowels and other voiced sounds. And when
    another person hears you, they follow the rapidly-modulating filter pattern among the
    upper harmonics of your laryngal buzz. -- As we listen to each other talk we are
    continuously and unconsciously receiving information from a hearing mechanism that is
    specifically responsive to fluctuating combinations of various harmonics above a
    fundamental tone - and this is exactly the same thing that can be said of musical harmony
    and scales. -- The fact that numbers are a convenient tool for structuring our
    understanding of the harmonic series is incidental; people enjoy music because they can
    hear and understand it in the same way they can hear and understand speech, not because of
    any hidden order in a numerological Cosmos. -- Just as music starts from one tone, the key
    note, this piece started from a single voiced sound, short i. Characteristically the short
    i has a lot of filtered harmonic content present around 2200 and 2700 cycles per second
    (approximately c# and e, three octaves above middle c). In relation to a laryngal buzz at
    165 per second, the short i sound will foreground the 13th, 15th, and 17th harmonics. --
    By deciding that the words in this song should have no voiced sounds other than short i, I
    pretty much limited my choice of consonants to c, f, h, k, p, s, and t. Every common
    English word made with these sounds went into the text. I allowed the three shortest
    words, 'if', 'it', and 'its', to be repeated. -- It was a complete surprise to me that so
    many vulgarities and intimate bodily functions emerged in the list. Why should this be?
    What is it about the simple sound of short i that has sucked it into this semantic orbit?
    And is it completely coincidental that boats and water appear so thematically? -- Before
    these collations are brushed off too quickly, it would be pretty smart to compare them
    carefully to the discoveries of a hidden numerical order in music that were so effectively
    exploited by Pythagoras, with the consequence that we have been haunted by a patrician
    interpretation of the world for the duration of &quot;Western civilization.&quot;</em></font></td>
  </tr>
</table>
</center></div>

<p align="center"><font face="Arial" size="2"><br>
<a href="artistlist.html">back</a> </font></p>
</body>
</html>
