The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #120143   Message #2612590
Posted By: Harmonium Hero
16-Apr-09 - 02:44 PM
Thread Name: 'Acoustic' and 'live' music
Subject: RE: 'Acoustic' and 'live' music
Glueman: What 'imagined idylls' are these? And what, exactly, is your point? I said I had no objection to the electric guitar; I grew up with rock & roll. It's probably why I'm here now. But rock music, in all its manifestations, is a product of the age of electronic amplification, which only goes back a couple of decades before R&R. Before that, music didn't have a jack plug - nothing imaginary about that. My music stil doesn't - nothing imaginary about that either. Whether you consider it idyllic is up to you; it doesn't have any bearing here. My gripe in my previous posts (go back and check) is about what this thread is about - the baffling mis-use of certain terms. In my case, it's part of a wider complaint about the breakdown of communication. A good deal of the time, people don't know what others are talking about, because of the way the language is being used. This goes beyond any normal linguistic evolution. Some of it is due to ignorance; a lot of it is due to an arrogant , smart-arsed attitude. Either way, the end result is that the language fails to function.
By the way, my 24-yeor-old son has a D'Angelico New Yorker and can play jazz. He doesn't do it to please his father. And no, it doesn't matter. But he doesn't go around calling it 'acoustic music'.

Curmudgeon.