brooklyn_ashey

great musicians always enjoy practicing- it is like making something new when done properly. If they arent enjoying it, they know they must get creative about it— otherwise it’s mindless.

Maurizio Pollini still practices like crazy- lots of hours. More than I do! (he is way better than I)

Glen Gould also practiced by playing slowly and very slowly and so on. He practiced by singing and not playing, and yes by playing at speed and as has been mentioned as something bad... he practiced pieces sll the way through for hours on end

I find it helpful to play the big phrase choreography—the shape of a phrase, making it a physical gesture with big muscles, actual exact notes be damned. Then add in notes, making it gradually more precise. But for anyone to say that slow practice is a mistake ever is just nuts! Slow practice is how we find hand and arm shapes and angles, how we listen to the sound- esp. for a non button instrument like cello. A musician who really stretches themselves toward greatness tries all the gaits at all the speeds and all the choice emphasis and every wacky thing they can think of to find something of truth in the music. Sometimes we improvise something harder and easier. A great musician is their practice- they are as fascinating as their practice methods- and the practice should be fascinating. The thing is to find one’s own method, not to do anyone else’s method. If one reaches for artistry in music, their practice must be innovative, stylistic, nimble and responsive to everything: training for flexibility. Training for facility is more like what is mentioned here- not bad, but if you want computing, computers are better suited!

and... why not a black flag anyway?

Thank you for this- was trying to think of that book. The positivity culture, in my view anyway, was the far-reaching soft-spoken herald of a growing fascism in our work cluture. It is not hard to see why it would need hardcore deployment in these times.

I agree! Why not a woman?

I will never understand why remote work isn’t more widely embraced. It’s bizzarre when an industry that prides itself on solving the big problems, and one that literally invented the web— a place where one can get stuff done without being in a dpecific place—can’t embrace the very new way of working it created, a way that would solve some serious housing issues. No one needs to live anywhere close to their “work” anymore, and yet we still have companies that force this upon us.

Well said. The question isn’t really “should” we decouple income from labor. We need to begin to concieve of a transitional process. Perhaps these kinds of schools are the first step, or perhaps there are even better approaches, but we need to help those who are being kicked by the current financial model. There is so much thinking and creating that is just trashed because folks can’t afford to participate.

Taibbi says, "The terrifying part of this controversy, to me, is the possibility that Facebook will ultimately engage in a kind of policing/censorship activity that all of these Senators may actually favor – perhaps driving down or eliminating certain kinds of alternative or dissenting speech in return for regulatory relief." What the heck? This is what Facebook already does! And about the absolute dumbest stuff too. I can't believe the banality and rubber-duckie-level controversiality of so much of the stuff I personally witnessed being censored before my eyes this past year. I mean, not that it was a shocker, but I had so terribly misjudged how low the limbo bar level of dumb went when it came to election censorship alone, not to mention censorship of the work of several Pulitzer prize winning journalists.

Musician here. I completely agree. But I think anyone can do this. We musicians transcribe solos of jazz players- not because we want to play like them, but because we want the feel in our vocaulary-- because we want to hear and understand better. Every musician I know learns languages easily and many are good at immitating accents and word choice. This is exactly what we do when we improvise in the style of... Mozart or whoever. It works!

Watch the same movie in English with the subtitles on. Pick some characters' speeches to memorize. Do this until you truly can do this in the voice of whichever actor interests you right now. I mean until you can do it on your own without the movie going. You will start to get a feel for the larger chunks and idioms, not to mention therhythms and melodies of it. I'd say we speak as much in rhythm and melody as we do in word choice. I'm a native speaker of American English, and I have trouble understanding David Tennant sometimes because of his chunking, melodies and rhythms- so different from American English. One has to get flexible with these. Regionally, just within the United States it can be tricky.

And wouldn't it be wonderful if those he sought employment with made that very simple, obvious calculation you just made? The article doesn't go into his years at the hotel and how he may have tried other things first before accepting that job- but getting perhaps turned away because of his non traditional background. I suppose we can look at it as his resilience as his ultimate triumph, but he seems to have been partially crushed by it. I feel for him. I do wish and hope that parents of kids who think they want to be pro musicians read his story correctly. It would probably make him feel good to rescue a life from what he endured. And I also hope that someone who is in charge of tech hiring at a company reads this story right, and one day makes the same calculation you did about a person from a non trad but highly rigorous educational background.

This is basically what happens to so many of us. And when we leave music, after studying so many things in great depth, we are treated as uneducated and illiterate; and so much precious time has been lost. And yet they always write these nutty, cheesy articles speaking of "gifts" and "mystics" and "prodigies" like there is some valuable genius that is being squandered. There is no magic in hours of practice, but that isn't the story anyone likes to hear. They like magic. Here's the big secret: everyone at conservatory is already a master player. This is the usual bio of those who can't land an orchestra gig or another position-- which is 98% of us, and the schools know it and know it is getting worse-- there are so few jobs, and what jobs there are are passed on in often unfair ways. (not merit based)Usually those who make it have money or deep connections through a long legacy. And when we try to have other careers, we are not embraced for these "magical genius gifts" people love to talk about in these articles. Everything hesays about classical conservatory is true. It's a life-consuming bootcamp that robs young people of time, money, and hope for a career in most cases. It's a pyramid scheme. I agree the Brahms are the best Sonatas, though.

Hey, I know! Blockchain, right?

only if they outline chord tones in their solo. (ha) They should get points off for taking too many choruses or for doing Parker transcriptions. wink

I don't understand. The Pro Publica study of around 1000 ex IBM employees versus your personal experience? Ok. Are you saying that there isn't an ageism problem? Ok. The fact is, technology companies have serious diversity problems. How much data will need to be presented for people to accept this and make an effort to work on it? Are you in a marginalized group besides the fact that you are an older worker? Can you imagine how truly difficult it would be if you were? I mean I'm happy that you aren't experiencing this problem yourself, but that doesn't mean that we just wave away what is actually happening. Just because lots of folks experience severe age discrimination doesn't take away from your or their accomplishments- it doesn't mean that you don't deserve the work and that if they were just generally "better" or more "skilled" that they would have lots of job offers.

"At the end of the day, as a person in technology, your major resources are your technical skills."

The article from Pro Publica argues otherwise-- with data to back it up. The point is: "culture fit" and "optics" are the new "technical skills". What about all those mentioned in the article who were getting great performance reviews, had the skillz and the lay-off just came out of nowhere due to their age? and them some are re-hired back as contractors at a $20,000 pay cut. No, skills are not your major resources. Your major resource is the leverage you have, and it ain't your skills. But it could be your fellow workers. Unions will have to go global to provide any serious leverage, however. If all the teachers struck with the West Virginia teachers, we'd have well-paid teachers. It might start to become an actual profession again. Kids might start getting an education again. It would be great to see that kind of solidarity happen in tech. Maybe the sysadmins need to lead this charge. Now they have some actual leverage.

I'm glad the good people at Pro Publica thought this was such an important issue and made that enormous effort to pull together actual data. That is an example of reporters doing their jobs. Over the past couple years on HN, it has been a rough slog to get this issue acknowledged by a lot of people. I've seen comments that would raise this issue aggressively downvoted, or at least pushed back against, hard. I'm not sure what it is exactly--- perhaps we as Americans desperately need to believe in meritocracy-- it is almost spiritual how much we seem to need that as a community. In fact, we are so in love with the idea that job awards, promotions, and continued employment in tech are meritocratic, we will just ignore data to "clap harder" in an attempt to make it so. So, now here is the data, thank goodness. No one can really say it is anecdotal any longer. And logfromblammo is correct- we all need to come together on this one. The labor laws respond to collective action-- that is how we got many of them in the first place. If we really need meritocracy so badly (and I think we do need to find a way to reward skill more accurately, or people get demoralized and that leads to even bigger problems, as it is right now...) we need to push hard for 1. actually blind interview practices (there is so much proof that this works to include marginalized groups- take a look at the screened auditions in major orchestras) 2. removing the ability of companies to "legislate" away labor protections from their employment contracts. 3. figure out how to act as a collective force to protect fair labor laws. Since we are a community of people who deftly wield software, I don't see that collective action should be much of a problem here. Ideas like the collecting of data (Pro Publica) and The Pursuance Project (Barrett Brown's organizing and collective action tool) could provide an idea of the way forward. But logfromblammo is right: we all need to wake up! first.

It was so boring. North and South Indian music is wonderful-I love it. But hearing Vijay break that down was mind-numbing. I like some of his music. Wadada can be great too! But I really wish we could stop justifying jazz by the labor it takes to produce/understand it. I need a break from jazz versions of Radiohead and Hendrix tunes as well. This trend is heralding the content crisis I'm afraid.

Does anyone know an excellent attorney in NYC who could examine a non-compete an engineer signed so they could actually accept another job offer?

One-upping is definitely a solo strategy that has a long history, and the tradition continues today. I just don't see Monk's key choice as some kind of proof of his skill. He wrote tunes that often sat awkwardly and offered a lot of space, like "We See" or "Coming on The Hudson" or even "Blue Monk" of all pieces. I feel those as offering freedom of direction and color- offering lots of rhythmic, motivic, and harmonic interpretational options. I guess that's why I love playing Monk tunes. And also his unique accent in the way he played- accent-inflection that was so of himself and so personal. It was confident and simple. I'm personally not a fan of the one-upsman approach to soloing, but it definitely exists.

exactly. well said.

Most jazz musicians today under the age of 45, went to music school. Brad Mehldau went to the New School. (someone mentioned Brad) The jazz faculty at the New School, when he went there at least, was ramming theory down every student (most music school does this as one of the main requirements of graduation). The piano/comp/theory teachers then (Gary Dial and Armen Donelian?) were all about the theory, especially for pianists, who kind of have to have the structure nailed down in their heads in order to accompany others at least.

But nearly every musician you will hear on a recording or at a concert these days went to music school. Music school has to employ all of its academic faculty, so as a result, they have to require several years of varying kinds of theory, counterpoint, jazz theory, etc. I could go into why the music schools feel that they have to overload every musician with all kinds of required theory classes, but you'd likely be bored. Let's just say it makes everyone feel comfortable with how legit pro they are.

So to answer the question, no, jazz is not unique. Bebop is not unique in this way. All musicians who go to a serious top-10 conservatory must waste a boatload of time taking all sorts of theory classes. Some programs are better than others. The conservatory I went to put musicians through a brutally boring and in-depth multi-year course of theory and analysis.

Totally agree with you. Excellent answer. Vijay most of all with the theory/math. I sat through a lecture he gave on ragas in jazz once, and it was essentially a math class about ragas.

You also rightly said, "For decades the musical music was captivated with math in the 20th century. This wasn't some spiritual journey in music it was a mathematical puzzle they were trying to work out."

Yeah, you are right, for some. But actually, for some others, it was a serious spiritual journey. Like for George Crumb! (way into numerology- used it in Ancient Voices, Black Angels and other pieces- yeikes!- but some people dig this-- remember though, some people also dig a good seance or a good horoscope you know?)

https://music7703lsu.wordpress.com/2017/03/12/liturgical-num...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11o8nHk-l_o

Also- look into Webern's beliefs about numbers. He was really driven/controlled by this superstition. There is certainly a tradition of just this kind of spirituality that is alive in jazz today. Sun Ra was all about this spirituality without the math stuff. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djBKQNVj5Cc

Anyhow, computers had a lot to do with this math obsession in 20th century music composition.

And Ornette? Was he about math at all? I may not know about this. For me, having played a lot of his music, I'd say that his music is a music-of-the-people, and much more about folk music than jazz, although he's of course a great jazz musician. One of the greatest, and maybe because of this fact. He had confidence in the simplicity of his ideas. He didn't seem out to prove anything to anyone. Harmelodics has absolutely nothing to do with mathematical relationships or theory. It's all about each bringing what they think to a melody. (in very short, here) But if he was about math, I just don't know it. Please tell me, so I can look into it.

Well, it's difficult to discuss this math/music issue in a just a comment-length mini-essay and manage to get at what I'm trying to convey. I didn't write the "nonsense" comment myself, but i do hear the legit and justified frustration in it. Sketches of Spain- beautiful. Xenakis though. Man, every time I have had to perform one of his pieces, I'm thinking I should be paid double or they should just hook a digital sound making device up to his score so they don't have to pay anyone to practice that stuff! I guess some people enjoy it? He is the perfect example of what I was trying to get at. Does he have ideas? I guess so...? Do i need to practice them? Um, only if I get paid double/triple for the gig. Know what I mean? It isn't that I'm saying that musicians don't ever practice this way or compose using these devices. Tons of jazz musicians sit around with Slonimsky, mathing their way to a technique in improv that is truly justified by labor. People do it. It is a bit ridiculous. There is a pianist here in NYC who does this- she's a fantastic pianist and composer without Slonimsky and the like. She has compositional ideas and stylistic ones. I will say she is a cold player, but she's battling it out in a tough shark tank, so I get that she feels she has to join the arms race. I'm just saying that the musicians/composers I admire most focus on the human communication, style, and content aspect of improv and the aspect of music that comments upon culture and also inspires cultural change and reflection. Nuance. in As a young musician, I was forced to practice this thinky-mathy way for various professors. With age comes the perspective and mercy I hope to show my students and colleagues when I don't spend our valuable practice and rehearsal time on retrograde-inversions and the set of combinatorial relationships in a given collection, i.e. things that don't sound like much (except to a music theorist who studied serialism and 12-tone) but are justified by practice room labor. I'm definitely not trying to claim that there aren't musicians that go down this path-- there certainly are! Famous ones, even! For me though, it's is a flag waving frantically that loudly signals a lack of artistic content, usually. But not always, as I said. This is only my opinion, however. I voiced it because there aren't enough musicians/teachers/composers who voice this pushback against the macho-mathy in jazz. There is this fallacy that anyone who can't play all mathy w the Slonimsky snippets weaving in and out of their improv should not be listened to when they say, "hey! why are we practicing this stuff??? I'm not a computer! I'm an artist-human!" I'm just saying some of us don't feel bullied (not saying you are doing that-you were just raising a legit point) and we feel perfectly fine calling out this approach for its mad dash to cover up for a severe lack of artistic content and a fear that one is vulnerable to being unseated from the throne.

I'd say jazz is really suffering from a lack of artistic content right now, and I believe it's a direct result of years of this kind of prove-your-mathy-badassery-technical-arms-race among jazz musicians. This is what happens when an "island is sinking"- people start pushing others off the sinking island so there is room for themselves. Jazz (and classical) is kinda sinking. Hopefully we can heal from this and get away from analogue versions of computer music (Xenakis) and back to humanity soon. It's funny, the defense against the sinking is causing it to sink faster by being less human, less relevant. Ironic.

But I sure didn't say that people don't get all up into the math of interrelationships in music theory. They do- I would hate for a non-musician to think they had to do that though to understand music. Absolutely not!In fact, I'm just saying that isn't what music is about for me, as a composer-musician. (I want to encourage people to love music, not to feel bullied by the 'difficulty" of its theory)

also: you said, "...He wasn't Thelonious Monk who just played everything in the hardest keys to prove how great he was on piano..."

What? I don't think that's what Monk was doing at all! Monk developed a sonic language all his own. I don't think any keys were hard for him... nor are they for any professional musician. Monk thought in sound texture and color. They are just different sounds. Sometimes you need a freshness or a timbre that a special key provides. Enough jazz music is written in B-flat if you know what I mean.

I agree with you on this as a lifelong musician and improvisor. It isn't the math of grammar we think about when conversing to convey meaning and style. We think about what we want to say and how we want to say it. We listen and build something together just like we do in conversation. There is a kind of obsession among some jazz players with spirituality though, it is true. If you are the sort of person who likes that kind of thing, you probably like prose writing like this as well. You certainly don't need to analyze all mathematical relations and artifacts to improvise masterfully. In my experience, the more time a player focuses on this type of thing, the less energy they put into actually having something to express. Or perhaps it has something to do with a fear that they will find they have nothing to say, so they avoid that challenge by making technique and mathematical-theoretical relationships the focus of their practice. The only composer I can think of who managed to be obsessed with the math of things while actually using them to create a unique language through which he expessed ideas,style, and narrative was Messaien. (in his modes studies and bird calls) I do understand why many jazz musicians reached for spirituality and really complex mathematical relationships in modes of improvisation:it's because they were not granted the legitamacy and respect they deserve (and craved, many of them, like Monk, for example) from so-called arbiters of "high culture". If what they were doing could be serious and difficult and inscrutable except with hours and hours of thinky labor, they felt it might elevate them.Of course this was totally not needed and what they (monk especially) were creating had a laguage and history of its own that was in many ways more innovative and culturally relevant than that what they sought to be included with. Of course that's easy to say now.It must have been frustrating, like for Ornette.

by the way, a landlord must notify the tenant of an opportunity to renew (or not) within 90 days of the sign date on the new lease. This isn't the issue at all. And I agree, the relationship should be mutually beneficial. It should definitely NOT be one where a tenant pays security and rent for an apartment and doesn't get a habitable place. Tenants just want what they pay for and sign a lease to that effect. How would you feel if you bought a new car that didn't have working breaks or a working engine after a month? Now what if the car dealer said, "Tough! See what you can do about it!" You would have to take them to court, right? Or at least seek relief. Or would you just take it and call it "mutually beneficial"? I don't know what a car owner would do in that case as I don't own a car, but you get my drift.

>they silently declare war on existing tenants by demolishing their homes while they live in them

you said, "That's nonsense”. Sadly, I’m afraid it isn’t. Here are some articles that might show you as much:

https://ny.curbed.com/2017/11/17/16670180/rent-regulation-la... http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/bklyn-slumlord... https://ny.curbed.com/2017/8/31/16233332/office-of-tenant-ad... https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20120506/chelsea/chelsea-ho... https://www.amny.com/news/tenant-harassment-brooklyn-1.14746... http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/landlords-haras... https://patch.com/new-york/bed-stuy/landlord-fakes-burglary-... https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/nyregion/new-york-landlor...

I think 8 articles demonstrates my point, but there are dozens of others.

Thank you, though, that helps me understand. I want engineers and others who think of moving to NYC to at least be prepped for reality, because I was not. While our situation isn’t as bad as the horrifying homelessness in tech cities in California, it is a close second, with problems that date back before the tech boom, and growing homelessness that will sadly soon rival the problems on the west coast. We were speaking about Airbnb in relation to this situation, and I see it as a force that could bring about real legal change through the process of legal sparring that might benefit tenants. It has that power because it threatens the current power. Tenants can’t do that- only huge financial giants can, if they work with tenants. Landlords have a powerful lobby here. The tech boom in NYC is only one of many new pressures on an already failing housing system here. The very long history of landlord tenant relations in NYC can seem like operatic exaggeration to someone who has not lived here as a renter who is doing well but isn't uber-wealthy. I can tell you that the declaration of war from a LL to a tenant is just as often not silent. It isn't subtle, and threatens life and safety. I lived in a rent stabilized building during the upscaling of what used to be a regular, family-oriented residential area of of Brooklyn. That area and many others in Brooklyn became ultra-luxe-hip and glittering faster than I've seen any previous gentrification move here. (Bed-Stuy happened very very quickly but not as fast as my previous neighborhood). And it can't rightly be called "gentrification", because unlike Bed_stuy, the area was too much of a well-maintained destination to begin with. Some of these landlords (mine included) held rent-stabilized properties in this area. When serious repairs were needed over the years, the LL would ignore calls, forcing residents into housing court to get emergency repairs done. In fact, this is often the only method stabilized tenants have of getting relief of any kind in NYC. The first time a tenant does it, they think, "Boy, i must have found a rare, totally insane landlord!” At housing court, they see how many others are dealing with this, and then they talk to friends who have lived in NYC a long time, and begin to read articles on the topic, and eventually realize it isn't all that rare.

These are not slums, mind you, just rent-stabilized buildings- they aren't all ugly on the outside. Many tenants were paying $1500/mo for tiny apartments 7 years ago, so not cheap by any means. The tenants were advanced-degree-bedecked professional architects, lawyers, professors and journalists, and they worked for legit companies like Spotify, Associated Press, NYU, Columbia, Google(gasp!) etc... I lived in such a stabilized building that was sold to a new owner who decided to “renovate” so they could charge “market”. (to give you an idea, the rents went from $1300-$1590 under stabilization to $2500-$4500 when they were done, and these were tiny apartments, the largest of which was a small one bedroom) The tenants were told that the LL was making repairs and that these repairs would last for a month. Well, the process lasted three years until it was shut down by the city after homeowners in the area complained about illegal construction. Eventually, the new owners finished.

Some tenants (who were able) moved out, some of us who could not (due to job responsibilities) stayed, thinking that it would be over soon. Those who stayed were not offered buyouts- they were always told it would only last just another week. Instead, they were subjected to constant water shut-offs, sledgehammers in the apartment above, below and on either side beginning at 6 am, lasting all day and long past the legal time to be doing construction. Dust mitigation laws were not followed and the place was filled with toxic dust and hanging pieces of plastic. Debris was everywhere. At one point and for a couple months, the unit next to mine was missing 3 of its 4 walls, just open to the 4th floor outside air- an open floor that a helicopter could land on. Ceilings fell in on existing tenants, one getting nearly hit on the head with falling brick from a ceiling that opened up while she sat on her toilet. One came home to a wet ceiling that had fallen onto their bed and destroyed it. Holes in floors and walls from the demolition. One was hospitalized with acute bronchial inflammation for several months and another developed a skin rash and repeated eye infections. One slipped on the stair and broke their leg. Finally, the tenants banded together and asked for buyouts after several months of this. There were not enough tenants to collectively hire adequate legal help. The landlord said he was ready for “war” with us. (the entity with billions behind it is the powerful one, and the tenants stand no chance) Eventually, the few remaining tenants got very small “buyouts" (a few thousand and a forgiveness of the rest of the months left in their lease, because...we were still being asked to pay rent!- without heat, without any water, and all of the above) When you go through something like this, you think it’s a crazy exception. In NYC, it has become an epidemic.

And now, the end result of years of this kind of slumlord-in-training gives us many newly minted and experienced market-rate landlords who know exactly what kind of abuse and neglect they can get away with because of the lack of enforcement of the rights of a tenant in the courts. (rights meaning basics, by law: a certificate of occupancy filed, inspections made, an onsite super to handle emergencies, no discrimination, heat, hot water, keys to the apartment, a legal lease, no using of security deposits for personal finance, no unannounced entrance into apartments, no fireworks or crazy parties until 5am during the week, and to get amenities you pay for like parking, a working laundry, a gym, trash removal) I think at $2000+ a month, a tenant should not have to take a LL to court to get a key or to stop a gushing leak. What is driving this? I think LLs who were previously slumlords have now entered the market rate arena. But I think they don’t have the cash flow to hang with the market. In my current, new, market-rate apartment in gentrifying Brooklyn, here are some things the tenants have had to deal with: renters were promised parking spots but no renter is allowed to use the parking lot and it sits completely empty, the certificate of occupancy was not filed and tenants needed to do a collective rent withholding to get him to do it (if this CofO isn’t filed, the city can chain your building and prevent you from entering-- yes with all your stuff in your apartment, including your computer-- for as long as they like until the LL files it- can go on for years, and yes, this happens, traditionally in Soho, but now in Brooklyn), the laundry room often has no working machines, many tenants don’t now have e-keys that would let them into their buildings because they are cheap and have broken but the landlord won’t replace them, recalled fire alarms, ridiculous electric bills of $500+ a month, gushing leaks that go unfixed, mold in common areas due to shoddy plumbing, armed homeless men sleeping in gym all day, parties on roof and in courtyard thrown by and attended by non-residents until 5 am with fireworks... and on and on. And I have friends who report the same in market-rate buildings. Is a six month security deposit and $2000 a month in rent enough to expect basic services? Apparently not in Brooklyn right now. I think this wave of market-rate tenant harassment is new, and word of it will spread eventually. But there have to be a lot of individuals speaking up, like here, on HN and within their communities. People don't like to talk about it. But eventually, with enough people reporting, it will be believed--it might take a while, and that is too bad. I’m glad Airbnb is ready for a fight.