Being a manager is hard enough without gitch religious trolls twitching their flaming tech tongues in a business vacuum.
There are bad managers / administrative departments out there. Lots of them. They are as good as the facts and information they receive, sure, but they are also as good as their intelligence and integrity. Someone once asked me "why are our admins so freakin' stupid and incompetent?" to which I answered "because if they weren't they wouldn't be working here for wages but at successful company X with its expanding markets and sweet result driven bonuses."
You can't expect people to just up and leave software that they're familiar with.
While that sounds good it doesn't wash. It depends what you are setting up to do. If you want a permissive, bug ridden system where most of your company's bandwidth is used for P2P and every three months your clients call you to tell you their computer has slowed to a crawl, go ahead and use Windows.
If you are running a class where you are developing software that runs on Windows, then use Windows. Fine. If you want to run a Windows Only App, and it won't run in Wine or there is no Mac equivalent, then no probs, you win, go for Microsoft.
But if you want a system where the idea is to minimize the cost of installing and maintaining terminals, maximize the portability of people's computer setups, and give people enough freedom to play without crippling everyone else's system, then go for a thin client model using Linux or BSD. For most people there is no 'familiarity' problem in clicking on an icon, doing stuff and then going 'File -> Save' then 'File - Quit' or finding a the little X in the top right corner.
This is indeed flamebait. If you install Windows onto a nuclear submarine, you're gonna get flamed, or fried or turned into glass. Best case you'll glow in the dark forever.
Management OTOH are complete fucking idiots, they'll always go with the inferior solution from the hardworking salesman. One day we'll have managers who'll think, "this salesman is working harder than the others because he knows his product isn't as good"
In my experience management tends to go for the product that has the best clicky-pends and coffee mugs and complimentary dinners. That being said, the same management is in a sealed off part of the building with high security locks and a separate parking area with a security guard and barbed wire fencing. I wonder what they know that they don't want us to know.
Isn't morphine still widely used in military applications?
Yeah maybe, but not as a stimulant. If the game designers think that's what morphine does then fair enough, ban it until they replace morphine with amphetamines.
...should the interpretation of music be limited to what the composer had available when he or she wrote the music?
No, interpretation can be anything. You can do Allegri's Miserere with electric guitars, drums and loads of distortion, death-metal style. That's fine, it comes down to taste and custom. But if you want to hear music the way people heard it when the composer was alive, then you have to accept those restrictions. As for the composer not having imagined the things we have today, well if they did they would never have written what they wrote, don't you think?
It's not, despite what the modern 'Early Music' curriculum might lead one to believe, as if music was invented out of whole cloth in AD 700, with the idea to sound one note against a different one not being conceived until a couple centuries later.
Definitely true, for non-church music. Inside and outside religious functions music had a different purpose and not surprisingly greatly different forms. But my question was rather whether it's a good thing for singers to learn vibrato if they are going to be singing music for which vibrato was never intended.
Try listening to a recording of the Tallis Scholars sometime.
With all due respect to them, and they are quite good (I have their music), but even they are capable of poor performances here and there. They are an adult choir which is frequently singing music written for men and boys, for example, so they will be calling on voices which are not strictly fit for purpose (again with all due respect).
I know this is splitting hairs and you're getting at the purist in me. I am not saying vibrato is wrong but frequently misplaced. Ideally music should be sung as the composer intended it or as was customary in the musical period. That's not always possible and, frankly, for liturgical music, who cares. It's function is more important than its form when it comes to that (that being said, the Tallis Scholars would not have really suit the liturgical requirements and, in the days of Pallestrina, Bruckner and Byrd, they would not have been allowed to sing at Mass).
If you don't mind me asking, when exactly did vibrato come into vogue?
Well as you suggest it's probably been around in some forms for time immemorial, and I know that in Gregorian chant notation there are trills, which are like transient vibrato, effectively, but not really the same thing. IANAM (i am not a musicologist) but Vibrato
was popularized in the Baroque era, was 'almost never used' during the Renaissance. I know that in early church music it wasn't used much because there was for many centuries an emphasis away from flamboyancy. Even the use of musical instruments (including the organ) was, for a long time, shunned.
The only time my voice got vibrato is when the handles of a pair of rivet squeezers snapped shut on my right testicle.
Vibrato is conscious oscillatory control of the larynx/hypopharynx. Watch someone's throat when they sing vibrato. My point was that when people learn it, most people use it for everything and when you ask them to just sing plain, clean notes, many just can't stop wobbling.
Nothing against it of course, vibrato is beautiful and has its place, but is some settings like early classical music and chant where, usually, they didn't sing like that (as far as anyone knows), it's annoying to listen to people doing an operatic, overly dramatic rendition of stuff that's just meant to be light, simple and, for lack of a better word, 'innocent'.
Seriously, just pick a note and sing it. What's so wrong about that?
Many a good choir is ruined by people who sing vibrato. Once a singer learns it, their voice is rarely if ever 'natural' again and many great (usually early) choral works cannot be sung properly.
Slashdot Mirror
It's simple, really.
So simple that nobody does it, for reasons unknown to anyone.
Iran's missile keeps me up at night more than my Ubuntu's package manager.
That depends on whether you live next door to one launchpad or the the other.
I've seen a lot of Sun boxes when I worked with MRI machines, I was a little surprised at that.
I've seen a lot of spiral CT scanners running Linux. Am yet to find out what our new MRI machine is running.
Being a manager is hard enough without gitch religious trolls twitching their flaming tech tongues in a business vacuum.
There are bad managers / administrative departments out there. Lots of them. They are as good as the facts and information they receive, sure, but they are also as good as their intelligence and integrity. Someone once asked me "why are our admins so freakin' stupid and incompetent?" to which I answered "because if they weren't they wouldn't be working here for wages but at successful company X with its expanding markets and sweet result driven bonuses."
I'm moderately certain you didn't.
You can't expect people to just up and leave software that they're familiar with.
While that sounds good it doesn't wash. It depends what you are setting up to do. If you want a permissive, bug ridden system where most of your company's bandwidth is used for P2P and every three months your clients call you to tell you their computer has slowed to a crawl, go ahead and use Windows.
If you are running a class where you are developing software that runs on Windows, then use Windows. Fine. If you want to run a Windows Only App, and it won't run in Wine or there is no Mac equivalent, then no probs, you win, go for Microsoft.
But if you want a system where the idea is to minimize the cost of installing and maintaining terminals, maximize the portability of people's computer setups, and give people enough freedom to play without crippling everyone else's system, then go for a thin client model using Linux or BSD. For most people there is no 'familiarity' problem in clicking on an icon, doing stuff and then going 'File -> Save' then 'File - Quit' or finding a the little X in the top right corner.
And who ever said you had to use a mac?
Not for use in nuclear submarines!
This is indeed flamebait. If you install Windows onto a nuclear submarine, you're gonna get flamed, or fried or turned into glass. Best case you'll glow in the dark forever.
Paper Clip: Do you mean Airbag?
No, he meant launch air. Bag was a derogatory term referring to the mother-in-law driving the car.
Management OTOH are complete fucking idiots, they'll always go with the inferior solution from the hardworking salesman. One day we'll have managers who'll think, "this salesman is working harder than the others because he knows his product isn't as good"
In my experience management tends to go for the product that has the best clicky-pends and coffee mugs and complimentary dinners. That being said, the same management is in a sealed off part of the building with high security locks and a separate parking area with a security guard and barbed wire fencing. I wonder what they know that they don't want us to know.
Of course that wouldn't have generated any free publicity, would it?
No, never, how dare you insinuate! ;)
Isn't morphine still widely used in military applications?
Yeah maybe, but not as a stimulant. If the game designers think that's what morphine does then fair enough, ban it until they replace morphine with amphetamines.
erm.. I saw you mentioned him already, about 20 milliseconds after I clicked submit. oops
Why not Douglas Adams' novels? I read those when I was 10 - pretty harmless except I had nightmares of electric monks for a week once.
there is nothing more sad then the Truth
...then the Truth what?
I knew he was guilty all along - just wanted to say a big HAHA to all the trolls that said he was innocent just because he wrote FOSS.
Is that you Hans?
With the assistance of my arms and hands, I find my mind can control all sorts of physical objects very easily.
Would all those present who have telekinesis, please raise my right hand.
...should the interpretation of music be limited to what the composer had available when he or she wrote the music?
No, interpretation can be anything. You can do Allegri's Miserere with electric guitars, drums and loads of distortion, death-metal style. That's fine, it comes down to taste and custom. But if you want to hear music the way people heard it when the composer was alive, then you have to accept those restrictions. As for the composer not having imagined the things we have today, well if they did they would never have written what they wrote, don't you think?
It's not, despite what the modern 'Early Music' curriculum might lead one to believe, as if music was invented out of whole cloth in AD 700, with the idea to sound one note against a different one not being conceived until a couple centuries later.
Definitely true, for non-church music. Inside and outside religious functions music had a different purpose and not surprisingly greatly different forms. But my question was rather whether it's a good thing for singers to learn vibrato if they are going to be singing music for which vibrato was never intended.
Try listening to a recording of the Tallis Scholars sometime.
With all due respect to them, and they are quite good (I have their music), but even they are capable of poor performances here and there. They are an adult choir which is frequently singing music written for men and boys, for example, so they will be calling on voices which are not strictly fit for purpose (again with all due respect).
I know this is splitting hairs and you're getting at the purist in me. I am not saying vibrato is wrong but frequently misplaced. Ideally music should be sung as the composer intended it or as was customary in the musical period. That's not always possible and, frankly, for liturgical music, who cares. It's function is more important than its form when it comes to that (that being said, the Tallis Scholars would not have really suit the liturgical requirements and, in the days of Pallestrina, Bruckner and Byrd, they would not have been allowed to sing at Mass).
But headlines like this are misleading.
This is slashdot. What's your point?
Furthermore the 41,000 number is misleading
See above. You must be new here ;)
Or wisdom, for that matter.
What about insight?
If you don't mind me asking, when exactly did vibrato come into vogue?
Well as you suggest it's probably been around in some forms for time immemorial, and I know that in Gregorian chant notation there are trills, which are like transient vibrato, effectively, but not really the same thing. IANAM (i am not a musicologist) but Vibrato was popularized in the Baroque era, was 'almost never used' during the Renaissance. I know that in early church music it wasn't used much because there was for many centuries an emphasis away from flamboyancy. Even the use of musical instruments (including the organ) was, for a long time, shunned.
The only time my voice got vibrato is when the handles of a pair of rivet squeezers snapped shut on my right testicle.
Vibrato is conscious oscillatory control of the larynx/hypopharynx. Watch someone's throat when they sing vibrato. My point was that when people learn it, most people use it for everything and when you ask them to just sing plain, clean notes, many just can't stop wobbling.
Nothing against it of course, vibrato is beautiful and has its place, but is some settings like early classical music and chant where, usually, they didn't sing like that (as far as anyone knows), it's annoying to listen to people doing an operatic, overly dramatic rendition of stuff that's just meant to be light, simple and, for lack of a better word, 'innocent'.
Seriously, just pick a note and sing it. What's so wrong about that?
Many a good choir is ruined by people who sing vibrato. Once a singer learns it, their voice is rarely if ever 'natural' again and many great (usually early) choral works cannot be sung properly.
I thought it was *my* right...
Your right is *his* left.