Grex Music2 Conference

Item 119: Music Conference Administrivia

Entered by krj on Tue Mar 24 19:22:09 1998:

The conference has slowed down again recently.  Is the burden of 18 months 
of items too great, or do people like having it as a convenient archive?
 
Is a conference restart in order?
73 responses total.

#1 of 73 by eeyore on Tue Mar 24 21:05:16 1998:

I'm honestly haveing no problems iwith it, but I'm also skipping alot of the
items...but I don't think that would change with a new conferance.  :)


#2 of 73 by carson on Tue Mar 24 22:10:18 1998:

(no problem with the number of items. many of them deal with music that
I either have no interest in, or deal with music of which I have little
knowledge [I tend to lurk in these items]. as Ken has lamented before, I
haven't really been able to discuss my specialty [hip-hop]. most of the
groups that I can discuss are pop acts from the past 10 years; if it
charted in the top 10, I should know something about the group.)

(I guess part of my problem with discussing music is, while I'd love to go
into the details of why LL Cool J featured Canibus on a remix, but dissed
Canibus not only on the record, but also left him out of the video, which
prompted Canibus to release a song entitled "Second Round KO" which
basically tears LL a new anal cavity, I'd much rather listen to the music,
and _feel_ the music.)

(hmm... in the process of writing this response [and struggling with it],
an idea popped in my head: would anyone be interested in a listening
party?)



#3 of 73 by scott on Tue Mar 24 22:24:32 1998:

It's been discussed before...


#4 of 73 by scott on Tue Mar 24 22:25:09 1998:

...and I'd be up for one.


#5 of 73 by mcnally on Tue Mar 24 23:01:26 1998:

  I might be interested..  whether anyone else would be interested
  in what I might be interested in, though, is an interesting question..


#6 of 73 by carson on Tue Mar 24 23:12:56 1998:

(that's the dilemma I have. few people seem interested in the history
of Eazy-E and NWA, or what Debbie Gibson has been up to, but, hey, if
you're willing to listen to the music first, and let me explain later...!)

(...but a listening party doesn't directly affect what Ken sees as
a lack of activity in the music conference. [it might indirectly, if
it encourages people to try out new music, and then those people begin
to discuss the music.] I don't really have an answer for that problem,
or even really good suggestions; the music conference is certainly
more popular than any conference I've fairwitnessed for the past four 
years, and the people who do take care of the conference do so well; the
music conference was the first conference that I discovered after Agora;
it even had the first response I'd ever entered in PicoSpan, once upon
a time!)

<carson thinks he's used too many semicolons in one sentence, and
hides from the grammar police>


#7 of 73 by mcnally on Tue Mar 24 23:33:48 1998:

   "Unit 23, we have a run-on sentence in progress in the Music Conference.
    Proceed immediately to the scene and use any means necessary to subdue
    the violator.."

  I don't think conference size is the root cause of dwindling participation
  though it certainly can't hurt to prune a little of the dead wood. 


#8 of 73 by orinoco on Wed Mar 25 02:56:59 1998:

I don't really believe in conference pruning myself.  What harm is the 'dead
wood' doing?


#9 of 73 by krj on Wed Mar 25 03:36:24 1998:

The grex ideal, as I understand it, is that we would just roll the 
existing conference out and retire it as "music2" for eternity.


#10 of 73 by mcnally on Wed Mar 25 06:12:27 1998:

  I can't recall, does Picospan have a special file that it shows you
  the very first time you join a conference (as opposed to the normal
  conference startup msg)?  If so, wouldn't it be helpful to put a
  little note about the "read since" command for first-time visitors?
  I know when I was first bouncing around many years ago I was quite
  put off by many conferences where it seemed like there was a huge
  body of stuff from ages back -- small, active conferences were much
  more attractive.


#11 of 73 by carson on Wed Mar 25 18:07:14 1998:

("set bulletin")


#12 of 73 by lumen on Wed Apr 1 02:05:43 1998:

This conference has continued to have a LOT of potential-- I was one who
worked hard to get the ball rolling and have people think of myriads of topics
concerning music.  (I'd like to hear more on music ed, music in the schools,
etc., etc. but most aren't educators.)

While the conference seems cumbersome, I think it's well organized,
categorically.  People can always come back with new information.  Perhaps
I am inclined to see this partly as an archive.


#13 of 73 by krj on Sun Aug 30 20:50:40 1998:

I 'retired' the chain letter scam in item 148.  You can still 
'r 148' if you want to see the item or its few responses.
 
If we get more of these I expect I will just kill them.


#14 of 73 by senna on Sun Aug 30 23:35:06 1998:

Thanks.


#15 of 73 by mrmat on Mon Aug 31 02:43:57 1998:

Yay!


#16 of 73 by mcnally on Mon Aug 31 05:00:38 1998:

  I'm not looking forward to the gory details in the next chain letter
  I get.  "A public access conferincing fairwitness broke the chain and
  the next day his CD player began scratching his irreplacable import-
  only folk music CDs.."


#17 of 73 by orinoco on Mon Aug 31 16:05:49 1998:

<rotfl>


#18 of 73 by mcnally on Tue Sep 1 08:46:10 1998:

  augh..  did I actually write "conferincing"?  my brain's almost totally
  shut down after the past couple of weeks, which doesn't bode well for
  back-to-school.  wherever did I get the idea that summer was supposed to
  be a time of mental recuperation?


#19 of 73 by senna on Tue Sep 1 13:15:27 1998:

My mind recupperated.  In California.  And it didn't even bother to take me
along.  It sent me three postcards.  


#20 of 73 by krj on Wed Dec 9 23:19:44 1998:

I'll kick this item.  In party, mziemba was arguing that it was time 
for housekeeping, that the conference was too confusing to newcomers,
and there were too many duplicate items -- numerous soundtrack 
items, for example.  Take it away, Mark...


#21 of 73 by lumen on Thu Dec 10 04:43:01 1998:

Good idea.  I had mentioned in the past that some folks were duplicating an
item or two, but it was too late, I suppose..

At least it's being done now.


#22 of 73 by krj on Thu Dec 10 05:11:53 1998:

There is really no way to prevent duplicate items.  You can't force 
people to do a 'browse' before starting a new item, and you can't 
force people to use clearly descriptive item titles.


#23 of 73 by rcurl on Thu Dec 10 06:11:42 1998:

I also suspect that a lot of new users don't know they can do a browse
much less a find (and many might not even care in the eagerness to
start a new item).


#24 of 73 by mcnally on Tue Feb 9 02:25:03 1999:

  If others feel they're appropriate I'll put up with them but I'm
  a little tired of the item links from the auction conference.
  Rather than a profusion of limited-time items linked into the
  music conference (which will then stick around and clutter the
  conference until doomsday or a restart, whichever comes first..)
  couldn't we just have an item where people could enter references
  to appropriate items in the auction conf?  That way those of us
  who aren't interested could forget it and have it stay forgotten..


#25 of 73 by tpryan on Tue Feb 9 05:05:21 1999:

        Who's gonna morn, if the itmes are de-linked up their freezing
in the auction.cf?


#26 of 73 by krj on Tue Feb 9 18:32:04 1999:

Well, there won't be any more auction links from this round 
of the auction.  I'll put my foot down.  :)   
No, seriously, aruba has declared that the auction is closed for 
new items.
 
The music-linked items have been among the more active in the 
auction, so I figure this is doing our conference's part for 
Grex financial support.  Civic virtue and all that.


#27 of 73 by eeyore on Thu Feb 11 12:05:40 1999:

I honestly don't mind them being here....since it brings attention to them,
when I know that I wouldn't have wanted to go through the auction conf.  And
it was just 2 or 3 items...:)


#28 of 73 by krj on Wed Sep 1 05:35:49 1999:

Another kick for this item.  
 
In November this incarnation of the music conference will have been 
around for three years.  I'm starting to think about parking this 
pile of items as "music2" and starting a new music conference for the 
new century.  Given the general chaos I expect around the year 
rollover, I'd probably want to start the new conference around 
mid-December.
 
We've talked about a conference restart twice before in this item and 
I've been talked out of it both times.  But I think I may push a 
little harder this time...


#29 of 73 by orinoco on Thu Sep 2 14:28:45 1999:

Is there any reason _for_ a restart, besides 'it's been a while'?


#30 of 73 by carson on Sat Sep 4 01:55:42 1999:

(in theory, it's easier to read through without fewer items. I believe
said theory developed from the days when more people were reading &
responding to items, with less frequency. granted, it's easier to 
browse through 20 items than 200 items, but it's also less likely that
the browser will find the item desired.)

(I'm all for a restart, BTW.)


#31 of 73 by orinoco on Sat Sep 4 18:20:38 1999:

Hmm....I kind of like having old items around: you never know when someone
will nudge one and make it active again, and they don't do any harm just
sitting there.  Also, in conferences that don't have a lot of constant
activity, restarts can make for less conversation and not more -- fewer items
to respond to.  But, whatever...I don't have any real strong feelings on this
one.


#32 of 73 by rcurl on Sat Sep 4 18:37:12 1999:

What, again, is the purported value of a restart? This is now an archive
of music information (and trivia). If you worry about newcomers, isn't
everything except a couple of items marked read for newcomers? 


#33 of 73 by lumen on Fri Sep 10 22:23:12 1999:

I think it depends on how you look at it.  A restart might encourage 
some new users to come in and create new items.  I think we can all 
agree that we've just begun to scratch the surface of the deep diversity 
of music-- Ken once told me that there are Usenet groups that are much 
bigger and possibly more thorough.

re:31  I agree that the structure we've created here is good-- we 
eventually return to all the old items here.  I don't necessarily think 
that we would have too much trouble regenerating discussion in a 
restart.  I think it would be possible to create a music2 cf that is 
significantly different from this one where we could encourage newcomers 
to come and participate.  I also think it's possible that if newcomers 
were to address topics that have been previously addressed here, that we 
could quickly and efficiently cross-reference them, especially for those 
that have access to Backtalk.

re:32  I don't mind that this cf has become an archive, but I am 
disappointed that it has become more so an archive of music trivia than 
music information.  Perhaps I am biased as a student of music education, 
but I think this cf has more potential than to merely be a repository of 
musicology for the general public.  I noticed that my item for music 
education and pedagogy has been dead for quite some time.  I'm not 
saying that we should discuss music theory, technique, and history in 
scholarly detail (unless someone's interested, heh heh), but I think 
they could be touched on a little more than they are.

I came to A2 a few months ago with my wife and although music careers 
are not really a strength of the area, I was nonetheless impressed with 
the incredible amount of resources that was here.  We were on the North 
Campus with Ken, Sindi, and Jim and I was just amazed with the displays 
in the music building-- seeing items I'd only read about before.  In 
short, I'm hoping that this cf will be a think tank for performing 
artists and composers as well as those who listen to them.

<babble=off>


#34 of 73 by rcurl on Sat Sep 11 05:25:54 1999:

The primary serious interest on Grex is computers. There are many
conferences with topics in which there are people with serious interests,
but not many people with serious interests in many of the topics are found
here. Its apparently the nature of the beast. 



#35 of 73 by lumen on Thu Sep 23 20:44:00 1999:

It would seem so since Grex is still on a relatively small scale.  I 
would like to think that trend is changing somewhat since more people 
are using computer-based technology than ever before.  Music 
performance and music education have been EXTREMELY affected.

I talked with my voice teacher some time ago about new software that 
plots out voice patterns.  It seems to be effective in producing a 
visual comparison between the voice pattern of a pitch sung ideally, 
and that of your own.  The technology is not new, of course-- it's been 
used in speech therapy-- but apparently, it's being used in vocal 
training for singing, now.  I forgot where Dr. Nesselroad said the 
developer was from; we don't have it here yet and he was discussing it 
with him elsewhere.  I think the developer lives closer to the East 
Coast than the West Coast over here.

I'm not sure how many of the music students here on this conference 
have used the TAP system for learning rhythm, but the system developed 
in Bellevue, WA (a suburb of Seattle) was taken from analog machines 
and converted to a software program called MusicWare by a company in 
Redmond, I believe, which would put it in the neighborhood where 
Microsoft resides.

It's true that music people in the computer industry are rare; today, 
it seems to be taking in M.B.A.'s and even some communications students 
(the industry is looking for social skills that perhaps some coders may 
be lacking).

Computer applications in music are very broad, but unfortunately, it's 
taking forever for the schools to catch up.  Since music education is 
often seen as a frill, it's usually one of the last areas to get 
widespread attention.

Now that I've said that, am I the only prospective music teacher here?  


#36 of 73 by tpryan on Sun Sep 26 14:17:16 1999:

        Cliff Flynt, Bill Roper, Steve Simmons, Steve McDonald, Dan Glassier
are all computer programers/workers that do music.  However, one would 
more likely finding them at Sceience Fiction conventions than at your
local coffe house.  
        I still can't read the coding, particularly those 'Go To' 
statements one finds in written music fast enough to process it in
real time.


#37 of 73 by lumen on Tue Sep 28 20:18:53 1999:

Well, yeah, and most of early synth music *was* based on programming, 
especially with the introduction of MIDI.


#38 of 73 by scott on Wed Sep 29 23:34:55 1999:

Depends on your defn. of "early" synth music.  If you go to Walter (now Wendy)
Carlos and "Switched on Bach", that was all analog and performed in real time
(well, multitracked, but not sequenced).  Programming didn't arrive until the
mid to late 70's, and was still limited to running only a few monophonic
synths.  The 80's, when personal computers coincided with the introduction
of MIDI, is when software became common.  

But I guess you could say drum machines were programming, and those appeared
in the 70's and perhaps even earlier.  The early units weren't really
programmable, though.

The presets on a Hammond drawbar organ were about as close to programming as
you could get, early on.  But then the Hammond was also the first additive
sine wave synth, way back in the 30's.  


#39 of 73 by lumen on Thu Sep 30 23:53:50 1999:

Yes, I was thinking of that, and I should have made the distinction a 
bit clearer.  The Information Society made a distinction between songs 
programmed in software and those programmed by hardware alone.

Wasn't the group noted for their work in synth programming by software?


#40 of 73 by krj on Sat Dec 9 00:50:27 2000:

((Leslie and I have phone problems at home.  They began Monday.
  They are intermittent problems; the phone started working this 
  afternoon for a couple of hours, long enough for the Ameritech tech
  to visit and declare that there *was* no problem.  Phone stopped working
  again just hours after that visit.

((Anyway, I'll be scarce in the conference this weekend, unless we have 
  another period of dial tone.

((If I was really ambitious, I'd take advantage of this party-free 
  period and write some reviews to be uploaded later...))


#41 of 73 by krj on Fri Jul 27 05:33:05 2001:

We forgot to wish the Music Conference a Happy Tenth Anniversary!!

Mike McNally entered the first item in the original music conference
on July 23, 1991.  That conference, save for the items we foolishly
deleted back when we worried about conference disk space, is 
available as the "oldmusic" conference, and someday it will be available
as "music1."  That conference ran until late 1996, when we started 
the second and current incarnation.


#42 of 73 by remmers on Fri Jul 27 17:39:00 2001:

If you wish to start a third incarnation, you have my full support.
This edition now has over 300 items.


#43 of 73 by eeyore on Fri Jul 27 18:51:53 2001:

Yeah, I was kinda thinking something like that too.  It takes longer than
anything else on my cflist to come up.


#44 of 73 by krj on Fri Jul 27 19:03:58 2001:

If you read this entire item, you might see why I have interpreted 
conference user sentiment as being opposed to a restart when the 
subject has come up before.  However, there is a certain neatness 
in the idea of having each version of the music conference represent
a half-decade, more or less.


#45 of 73 by orinoco on Fri Jul 27 21:46:53 2001:

True, true.  And if you've done it twice, it's traditional, so you don't have
to argue about it the third time around :)


#46 of 73 by mcnally on Fri Jul 27 21:55:22 2001:

  I'd be in favor of a restart..


#47 of 73 by krj on Fri Jul 27 22:19:24 2001:

Some questions:
   I'm pretty adamant about having item #1 be (1) essentially the 
contents of resp:1,7  (item 1, response 7) and (2) frozen, so that 
newbies get something helpful and meaningful when they first join.
Suggestions for improving that first item are welcome.
   Kewy and raven: you haven't been very active.  Do you want to 
continue as fairwitnesses in music3?
   What else would people like to see in a conference restart?
 
I'd like to get back to scott's idea of putting an index to hot items
in the login screen.  But people bitched at the layout I used last 
time.  Scott, I'm punting this to you.  A login screen change doesn't
have to coincide with a restart, of course.


#48 of 73 by krj on Fri Jul 27 22:23:27 2001:

Oh, and I promised Mickey he could have an easy-to-remember number for 
his Miscellaneous Thoughts item.  Any other special requests?


#49 of 73 by scott on Fri Jul 27 22:35:22 2001:

I think the other issue with the hot-item list was what items should be
listed.  I guess I'm not that excited about the idea anymore.


#50 of 73 by orinoco on Sat Jul 28 19:18:28 2001:

<nods>  It sounded like a good idea, but it seemed hard to put into practice.

Two thoughts:

You could have a login screen listing the current incarnation of some of the
`traditional' items: Now Playing, John's Ragtime Journal, maybe the endless
Napster item.  On the one hand, these items are pretty often active, so
they're a good thing to have pointers to.  On the other hand, I don't know
how interesting they'd be to someone who doesn't follow the conference
regularly anyway.

You could also have a login screen explaining the Picospan `browse' and `find'
commands.  "To find currently active discussions about Celtic music, type
`find "Celtic" since -5'", or something of that sort.  I'm not sure if that's
assuming too much Picospan knowledge of new joiners or not -- after all, once
you find the items, you need to be able to call those items up, get to the
response you want, and so on.  

Was the idea behind the Current Item List to help new members, or as a crutch
for the memory of regulars?  


#51 of 73 by krj on Sun Jul 29 01:57:44 2001:

Newbies would just need one line to point them to the Picospan Cheat
Sheet in Item 1.


#52 of 73 by arianna on Sun Jul 29 03:39:19 2001:

if you think 300 items is bad, you shoulda seen how slow the original poetry
cf was... over 999 items... I would go make a cup of tea and a sandwich while
I waited for it to load...


#53 of 73 by krj on Sun Jul 29 06:28:20 2001:

Somebody at lunch said today:  Gee, after the Cooking conference was 
restarted, it was never the same...   :/
 
Here are the items I want to link into the next music conference.
I can be talked into adding many items into this list  :)  though 
there are some I'd just as soon leave here, to take a fresh start
on the topic:
 
item
----  
  9 231 Ragtime Notebook
           (One of the oldest active items on Grex.  History demands
            its continuation.)
293  35 Music Retailing
           (We just rolled this item a little while ago)
300   6 Mickey's Miscellaneous Musical Musings
313  31 History of Music in two semesters
315  73 The Sixth Napster Item
           (The Napster items roll with Agoras)
317  14 British Folk

In addition, there would probably be pretty directly, new items on the 
following topics:
Personal introductions
NP: Music to Conference By
CD recorders
    (or should we continue the existing item?)
Folk & Roots: Continental Europe & The Mediterranean
    (Mickey and I have a lot to pour out here)
World Music: Africa and other warm places
Opera  (linked to Classical; I might just take the existing opera item)
Shows At the Ark
 
<krj gets very scared at the idea of tampering with the music conference.>


#54 of 73 by scott on Sun Jul 29 13:47:10 2001:

I think we ought to link or at least cut&paste the current CD burner item,
since it is full of still relevant info.


#55 of 73 by krj on Sun Jul 29 15:18:55 2001:

ok.


#56 of 73 by ashke on Sun Jul 29 15:48:51 2001:

don't forget the "heavy rotation" item.  If not a link, then a new one.


#57 of 73 by krj on Sun Jul 29 17:20:28 2001:

We can create new versions of any of the items you want, but stuff 
which is mostly/entirely lists is the sort of thing I would prefer 
not to link.  Remember that today's conference will be available as
"music2" for as long as Grex lasts.


#58 of 73 by krj on Tue Jul 31 17:31:27 2001:

Hmmm, did talk of a restart convince everyone to save their thoughts
for the new music conference?
 
Is there a rough consensus to go ahead with this?


#59 of 73 by eeyore on Wed Aug 1 00:14:12 2001:

I'd say go for it. :)


#60 of 73 by cmcgee on Wed Aug 1 01:06:57 2001:

Sure, do it.


#61 of 73 by remmers on Wed Aug 1 13:55:26 2001:

D'accord.


#62 of 73 by krj on Wed Aug 1 21:28:25 2001:

I have sent mail to cfadm requesting a start to the restart process.


#63 of 73 by tpryan on Wed Aug 1 22:13:22 2001:

        What I would like to see is when we start to get clutter in
music3, items get linked to music2 and removed from music3.  Things
like the On Stage 1997 item is wonderfull stuff for us grex verbage
pack rats, but a huge obilisc to new users, who may be used to the
newsgroups where all postings go away in around two weeks or less.


#64 of 73 by krj on Fri Aug 3 17:15:04 2001:

If we were going to do that I'd want to set up maybe music3 and music4,
with music3 as the storage conference.  I like having the conference
be an archive of a five-year block of time.  
 
Walter has set up the new conference; I'll try to load the first item 
and link in the items mentioned above this weekend sometime.
(Other fws, please hold back on this for now.)   
 
Any more items people want to link out of this conference to music3?


#65 of 73 by anderyn on Fri Aug 3 17:44:01 2001:

Well, the new one, 320. Please. :-)


#66 of 73 by krj on Fri Aug 3 18:12:58 2001:

I'll plan to link all new items beginnng today into the new conference.
(Unless they are really, really, really stupid ones designed to piss off
the fairwitnesses...)   If you have some comments to add to an old
item, and it isn't on the list of items to be linked to music3 -- 
"Musical Obituaries," for example, or "Heavy Rotation" -- 
consider starting a new incarnation of this item with the "enter" 
command.


#67 of 73 by krj on Fri Aug 3 23:42:46 2001:

------(planned item 1 text, comments welcome)-------
(remember this is the first thing a conference newbie will see)
 

Welcome, newcomers and veterans, to the Grex music conference!!
We talk about all sorts of music here, as well as the technologies
and business of music.   Feel free to start a discussion on a topic
you are interested in, and see who joins in.
 
If you have any questions or suggestions, please send e-mail to
your active hosts, krj@cyberspace.org or scott@cyberspace.org


NEWCOMERS:  If you came to Grex via telnet or direct 
dial, here are my suggestions for getting up to speed with 
our antique Picospan conferencing system.  (You might want to print 
this text out, or make a few quick notes to have a cheat sheet.)
 
* at the 'OK:' prompt, type                 read since 2/1       
  to read discussions in the conference since February 1.  
  Replace that 2/1 date with a date between two weeks and two months
  ago, depending on how much you want to read.
 
* Next, at the 'OK:' prompt, type           browse
  to see all the subject lines.  Note down the item numbers of any 
  subject lines which look promising.  To read item 3, 
  the Ragtime Music item, type              read 3
 
* At the bottom of each item, the prompt will read 'Respond or pass?'
  There is a third choice:                  forget
  Use 'forget' whenever you find an item too boring to bother with.
 
   ((If you came to Grex through the Web interface, none of these 
     commands apply to you.  Backtalk, the Web interface, is pretty 
     intuitive for most users.))
 
* To get back to see item 1 & these instructions again,
  from the 'OK:' prompt, type:               r 1


Thanks for visiting Grex's Music conference!  

Grex also has a Classical Music conference:  j classical

and there are two old versions of the 
Music conference kept as archives:
                   1981-1986                 j music1
                   1986-2001                 j music2

(responses will be frozen)


#68 of 73 by krj on Fri Aug 3 23:48:59 2001:

Ooops, make that 1991-1996 and 1996-2001, sigh.


#69 of 73 by krj on Mon Aug 6 18:07:54 2001:

I'm hoping to get to this in the next day or so, though my life is 
complicated right now by Leslie's return from Europe.  
 
I'm a little worried that after I link in the continuing items, 
Music3 is going to look like The Folk Music Conference.


#70 of 73 by arianna on Mon Aug 6 19:28:30 2001:

don't worry, the young'n's will take care of that. *Wink*


#71 of 73 by tpryan on Tue Aug 7 16:56:11 2001:

        I would like to support the music3.cf/music4.cf to keep 
the conference clean and cleanable.


#72 of 73 by krj on Fri Aug 10 19:51:36 2001:

I have set up music3 and asked conference administrator Walter (i)
to swap it in.  At some point very soon this conference will become
"oldmusic" and it will also be known as "music2;" the original 
music conference will be "music1."


#73 of 73 by krj on Sat Aug 18 17:04:51 2001:

As of a little bit ago, the conference restart has happened.
Please let me know if there are any more discussions to link 
over from this conference; go nuts creating new versions of 
your favorite list items.
 
Good bye to music2, which I think was pretty successful.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: