Slashdot Mirror
A Music-Sharing Network For the Unconnected
An anonymous reader writes: Operating as personal offline versions of iTunes and Spotify, the téléchargeurs, or downloaders, of Mali are filling the online music void for many in the country. For less than a dime a song, a téléchargeur will transfer playlists to memory cards or directly onto cellphones. Even though there are 120,000 landlines for 15 million people in Mali, there are enough cellphones in service for every person in the country. The spread of cell phones and the music-sharing network that has followed is the subject of this New York Times piece. From the article: "They know what their regulars might like, from the latest Jay Z album to the obscurest songs of Malian music pioneers like Ali Farka Touré. Savvy musicians take their new material to Fankélé Diarra Street and press the téléchargeurs to give it a listen and recommend it to their customers....This was the scene Christopher Kirkley found in 2009. A musicologist, he traveled to Mali hoping to record the haunting desert blues he loved. But every time he asked people to perform a favorite folk song or ballad, they pulled out their cellphones to play it for him; every time he set up his gear to capture a live performance, he says, 'five other kids will be holding their cellphones recording the same thing — as an archivist, it kind of takes you down a couple of notches.'”
For less than a dime a song, a téléchargeur will transfer playlists to memory cards or directly onto cellphones.
Is this safe, just handing your phone over to get it loaded up with songs? For all anyone knows, the téléchargeur software was downloaded at SourceForge and is full of malware.
The friends of RIAA in Africa will descend upon these guys as soon as they can. This is piracy pure and simple, and the rosy portrayal of it as "Africa workaround" won't do.
Frankly I've given up on the whole giant music collection thing. I've lost interest in it. It's not that music sucks, it's just that I barely have time to spend on it. Once your personal collection busts a couple hundred gigs you hardly know what you have anyway.
You're holding it wrong.
Téléchargeurs
é
You would think something filling "the online music void" would be, you know, filling it online?
Otherwise, there's still an "online music void", and what these guys are doing is "Download MP3's to your device for you to play locally, just like any other MP3 player". So they may be filling the "get MP3's onto my phone void", but they are certainly not filling the online void, because it's still a void.
Also... I assume they aren't paying the original copyright holders for this, they're just pirating the music, right? There's no way you are legally getting music for $0.10, unless it's being locally produced and distributed.
Why, I wondered, would anyone need a cellphone without a network connection? It was a question as dumb as my simple Nokia phone. A cellphone is a digital Swiss Army knife: flashlight, calculator, camera and, yes, audio player.
It now is a giant android turd screen whose only use is to make money .. for others.
You are NOT sharing music if you are paying for it. The summary clearly states that songs cost a dime or less.
Be seeing you...
The article seems to have neglected to mention what kind of music Kirkley actually found. He released a few volumes of "Music from Saharan Cellphones", which can be purchased here: https://sahelsounds.bandcamp.c...
I quite like some of it, and the hipster cachet it conveys is pretty considerable as well.
Not according to Collins nor dictionary.com. The only source I have found that corroborates what you are saying is the *abridged* Merriam-Webster dictionary. The unabridged dictionary matches Collins and dictionary.com stating that it is sounds that are played in time with harmony, melody, and rhythm.
Care to provide a cite?
"the acoustic space in which one hears a concert directly affects the likelihood of the emergence of his sought-after transcendent experience. The acoustic space within which one hears a recording of one of his performances, on the other hand, has no impact on the performance, as it is impossible for the acoustic features of that space to stimulate musicians to play slower or faster."
The above text is from the english-language wikipedia article on Sergiu Celibidache, as it formulates the idea better than I could have.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Shall we have an argument about what makes art or not now?
Faffing about over the context of a word (which all evolve anyway) which millions of people use to refer to recorded music in the same way as live music is really just pontificating.
Music is the thing. Whether you saw it live or recorded it, it was music. It's pretentious to pretend that you can change a definition of a word based on digging up a quote to suit your personal use of it.
And to suggest there's something otherwise undetectable or irreproducible in the air to distinguish between live music and a sufficiently good recording of that music played back to you, it's gold-plated oxygen-free cable territory.
Sure, you probably enjoy the live one more. It's the difference between going to a theatre to see a play or watching it on TV. There's nothing quite like people coughing throughout, treading on your toes, rustling their pockets behind your ear, clapping too early or too vigorously or trying to join in from the seat next to you.
But to suggest that ONLY live music can be music is... just silly in this day and age.
Sounds in melodic or harmonic combination, whether produced by voice or instruments.
I scanned the entire article "music" in the OED. It does not even contain the word "record" or "recording". The youngest quote in the article being from 1975, when the possibility to record sound/music had already been extant for many decades, this clearly indicates the OED makes a sharp distinction between music and records thereof. QED.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Shall we have an argument about what makes art or not now?
Yes, please - if it can be done without insults, trolling and ad hominem attacks. It is then called "a discussion", and not only are - AFAIK - discussions the very purposing of Slashdot comments, discussions can be fruitful and interesting.
But to suggest that ONLY live music can be music is... just silly in this day and age.
Disagree, strongly so. Let me illustrate this with an example. Could you pretend you had a talk with another person, whenever all you'd had was a telephone conversation with that person ? No, you couldn't. Having an actual talk implies the visibility of hand gestures, facial expressions and body language, as well as the two of you being in the same acoustical environment, something even a very good video & audio recording can not provide. Hence, having an actual talk requires physical presence. I am saying that hearing actual music requires hearing that music live. See the informal Celibidache quote in one of my comments further up.
It is certainly a consequence of technology providing us with the possibility to have cheap copies of recordings of sound and images that uncounted millions of people equal, in their mind, "a recording of music" with actual "music". It is not because of uncounted millions of people doing so that making that equalization is also valid, or a mere tautology. So, I am just doing the best I can in trying to get things right. Even if that involves saying an inconvenient truth.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Wow, aren't you an obnoxious little shit.
That's a lot of dopey gobbily gook. Sergiu was a kook and a douche bag. Fuck him. For that matter, live performances with electrically amplified instruments sounds like shit regardless of the listening environment. Acoustic instruments, however, can sound good depending on the environment.
Oh, get over yourself you pompous imbecile. Have you ever stopped to consider that perhaps your perception works in way different from most people? I most certainly consider telephone conversations to be *talks* with other people and don't perceive them as something fundamentally different. Seeing you claim otherwise so pompously and self-assuredly only makes me want to slap you for being so close-minded.
No discussion of the FACTS will be allowed, presumably...
So WHY is Mali a third world hellhole? Must be the weather.
Or the LAND MASS itself, that makes anybody who stands on it have an IQ of 70...
I like this article very muchit's great.I'm Custom Glass bottlesnice to meet you
Music, by definition, is a pony, because I have just defined it so.
That is not a useful definition since no one else will use it. However, it more entertaining that a tautology like "music is live music".
'It does not even contain the word "record" or "recording"'
Therefore that definition cannot reject recordings as being music and you have disproven your own claim.
you're implying if I close my eyes during a conversation I am no longer having a talk. that is just silly.
you are confusing a performance with music. if it is just a recording, then of what is it a recording? music
if you wish to differentiate between live music and recorded music that is fine, but to say recorded music isn't music is just wrong. you are splitting a hair that doesn't exist.
music may sound differentl coming from my home audio equipment than from the live performance due to the acoustics of my living room but that doesn't make it any less music.
I understand what you are trying to say, that the music is inseparable from the environment. that is one reason I despise recordings of "live" performances. the experience just for not translate for me and it bugs me. I prefer studio recordings which provide a neutral environment. that allows me to listen to the music in my current environment.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Actually, since it doesn't make the distinction as to the medium said music is delivered in it actually invalidates your point instead of supporting it.
You will note that your quote also does not specify that an audience even be present, or even that it has to be in the audible range, just that the sounds must be produced by voice or instruments. This means that a computer with no persistent storage can make music, if it is played to an empty area. It also means a computer with no speakers can make music as long as it is recorded onto storage media that is capable to be played back at a later time ( and note that playback is NOT a requirement, it would still be music even if never heard ).
That's the thing about Dictionaries, if it ISN'T in the definition, I.E. specifying the medium be live for music, it by definition isn't a requirement.
To err is human; effective mayhem requires the root password!
I am trying to say that recorded music is not equivalent to live music. It is music minus something. Just as a talk with your eyes closed is a still a talk, but a talk minus something. Sheet music is music, too - it is music minus any performance. Only music performed live is music to the full extent.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
I personally do not enjoy listening to live music. I do enjoy going to concerts, but when I go, it's not really about the music. You are not in the same acoustical environment as the musician when you are in the middle of the floor, or 300 feet away in the nose bleed section. The musician is on stage, with ear pieces, so they can actually hear what they are playing. It's hard to really appreciate the music in a building filled with fans singing along to the music and bad arena acoustics. Doubly bad is recordings of live music, where you still get all the crowd noise, making it hard to really hear the music, without any of the fun of actually being there.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
We may be talking about different things. You seem to exclusively mention concerts of amplified music, where indeed most of what you say applies. With non-amplified ( "acoustic" ) music, it is quite radically different.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Only music performed live is music to the full extent.
And only cheeseburgers with brie are truly cheeseburgers to the full extent.
Could you pretend you had a talk with another person, whenever all you'd had was a telephone conversation with that person ? No, you couldn't. Having an actual talk implies the visibility of hand gestures, facial expressions and body language, as well as the two of you being in the same acoustical environment, something even a very good video & audio recording can not provide. Hence, having an actual talk requires physical presence.
Assuming that to be true....
I am saying
No, you're not. Because we're not physically present, so you're not talking.
Either way, I'm not listening.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
are you perchance a Scotsman?
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
You are an idiot.
Music is, per definitionem, live music.
That you have to clarify "live music", defeats your own assertion.
"Musicologist"
"Archivist"
"haunting desert blues"
Sounds like someone needs more NPR grant money. This is a 6 year old thing.
You're just being a pretentious idiot, but if you want to appeal to authority my cousin is a USC doctor of music who plays with the LA Phil and he says you're full of crap too.
Still has the sounds of the crowd that interfere with listening to the music. Perhaps going to hear a rendition of a symphony in a concert hall would be nice, because people going to those things don't generally let out hoots, hollers, and whistles throughout the performance. Nirvana's Unplugged in New York which is generally considered by many to be a great album, I find, is ruined by the guy asking "what song is it" at the end of two tracks in a row, when he's talking about how he's going to screw up the song, which in itself is pretty bad, admitting that you didn't really practice enough for your own performance so you don't screw up your own songs.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
What I would like is the phone manufactures to enable the FM receivers in their devices so I can listen to the Radio from my phone, without a data plan, or having to be in Wi-Fi.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
So when Mozart wrote down his music, it wasn't music? What about music that Beethoven wrote when he was totally deaf?
"if it can be done without insults, trolling and ad hominem attacks" - Vikingpower, those who live in glass houses shouldn't cast stones. If you really are interested in a discussion you need to do something about your tone and "arguments".
I'm sorry, but you appear to be randomly making shit up and passing it off as a fact.
There is literally a century of precedent for people to refer to recordings of music as music. You don't get to suddenly decide it isn't music now just because you throw in a bit of latin.
Yeah, like that jerk next to me who spills into my seat, the little bored brat behind me kicking my chair, or lots of things which aren't "music".
Honestly, what the hell are you talking about?
You seem to be retroactively applying arbitrary semantics which fly in the face of a very large amount of precedent in the real world. But since it has nothing to do with reality as experienced by anybody else ... well, it's kind of meaningless drivel.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
*facepalm*
You ARE one stupid fucker.
I generally agree with your premise, but I'd have to say that it's rare that I get marijuana smoke wafting into my face while I'm sitting in my car listening to the radio. Granted, that's just anecdotal evidence, but...
Log in or piss off.
Oye, recorded music isn't performance music ... it is missing something. It is simply music. It is the performance that is missing, not the music. I like a good live performance as much as the next guy (maybe more, I spent a *lot* of time in jazz clubs in my youth), but to say a recording of the show isn't music anymore? Preposterous.
He can't be, none of us would make such a bonehead statement ;)
Apk took you apart on it with facts http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
Smithling go away. You're too stupid to live.
I'll bite, WTF is smithling?
Musica Cloud - a free MP3 download site, news & artists
Musica Cloud is a social music network that help you to share your music from a free member account to premium member account. Musica Cloud help you to expand and grow your music network to become the biggest one on your envirement.
www.musicacloud.com