Re: In C (Terry Riley)

Dennis,

We won't be streaming but there will be minutes and of course the
presentation materials will be shared here.

I still recommend waiting to take this further, because then we can all
take advantage of having heard and read the same material that addresses
these questions.

One final note -- belaboring (i.e. repeating the same points made
previously) is not going to be helpful to anyone's cause, but we all
welcome fresh thoughts!

Best,

.            .       .    .  . ...Joe

Joe Berkovitz
Founder
Noteflight LLC

49R Day Street
Somerville MA 02144
USA

"Bring music to life"
www.noteflight.com

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz <
bathory@maltedmedia.com> wrote:

> On Thu, April 6, 2017 7:25 am, Joe Berkovitz wrote:
> > Please leave off trying to make the CWMN aspect of MNX into a generalized
> > representation for arbitrary music notation. It is not designed to work
> to
> > do that. I do not want to have more discussions about how to use the
> > current CWMN proposal to cover pieces that lie well outside of its range.
> >
> > Let me say again: a different strand of this group's work is going to
> > address the larger, broader range of music notation, and this should
> > include pieces like Riley's works, which which I'm familiar. It should
> also
> > include pieces *much further* from CWMN.
> >
> > I suggest we discuss this tomorrow in person and not belabor these points
> > on the list until then.
>
> Can we belabor? I'm not able to be there in person, and would like to hear
> such a discussion. (Perhaps you will be streaming? If so, where?)
>
> Thanks,
> Dennis
>
>
>
>