While I concur that “perfect pitch” is a vernacular term, the issue that absolute pitch is wholly genetic, like say, blue eyes, is still a controversial theory in the scientific community.
Where bad habits and high art meet.
In a field dominated by Ph.D.s, it seems like career suicide to create something financially successful. Selling out isn’t an option for those trying to enter the game.
Is computer notation software still even debatable, or is it just a pet issue for the Luddite fringe?
When confronted with names of people I’d never heard of in the voting booth this morning, I suddenly felt a kinship with the imaginary folks in so many classical music critics’ articles who feel bewildered by unfamiliar names in a record store or on a concert program.
What is perfect, or (as it is also called) absolute, pitch? It is relative, not absolute, and anything that is relative is not “perfect.”
Label yourself (and your Honda) in support of new music.
Why do composers discount music’s surface level? Maybe the key to deeply engaging listeners lies at the most uncomplicated, superficial level of musical expression, the facade that hides all that ungainly counterpoint and harmony.
No composer has the power to force a listener to approach his or her piece in a particular manner. On the other hand, how can a composer write for an audience with a potential infinitude of ways to listen?
When does early music really end?