Tags for this video have been changed from 'Ice Skater, improve everywhere, Ice Theatre of New York' to 'Ice Skater, improve everywhere, Ice Theatre of New York, Mozart, Clarinet Concerto' - edited by Ornthoron

>> ^KnivesOut:

In other news, YET ANOTHER anonymous internet dbag has explained in great detail why he can't be bothered to give a shit.>> ^westy:
not really that cute skipped all the music , because I cannot give a shit about yet another person playing an old song in video format , if however sum-one was playing this in the room with me then id listen , or it was sumone doing something more original with the song in a video then that would be fine evan if it was played technically worse.



What i said is entrly logical , how is it entertaining watching sumone do the same task that i have seen hundreds of times before ? I made it clear that If this was in real life id sit and listen as that would provide a unequ exsperance ( dont know manny people who play peano) as apossed to online where i can load up amazing tellent in a few clicks. and I dont find the girl in the video cute.

Sure I love watching sumone build microchips or perform a task in a factory a cuple of times and learn a process thats as intresting as annything else , but after knowing the process and seeing it hundreds of times its no longer intresting. ( the way this person is playing to me comes across as very procedural , its not bad but it suports my piont that if i want to listen to simply well performed peano online why would i spend time watching this girl when i could watch other people that play in my opinoin far better.

Rather than just name calling maby you can actualy exsplain why i'm a "dbag" , from usage of the word "dbag" randomly calling sumone that without anny justification and no real backing, in a way to make oneself feal slighty better or to come across as better to ones peers is far more "dbagish" of a comment than what i Put.

Cool arrangement by Arcadi Volodos: http://www.scribd.com/doc/6118835/Turkish-March-Mozart-Volodos

In other news, YET ANOTHER anonymous internet dbag has explained in great detail why he can't be bothered to give a shit.>> ^westy:

not really that cute skipped all the music , because I cannot give a shit about yet another person playing an old song in video format , if however sum-one was playing this in the room with me then id listen , or it was sumone doing something more original with the song in a video then that would be fine evan if it was played technically worse.

In centuries past, the best music was written in the name of God, from bad asses like Bach, Mozart, Handel, Haydn and Beethoven. These days, religious music is pretty much the worst stuff out there. Sad.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

No, he is nearly making the subtle, but logical distinction between phenomenon and noumenon. Have had this conversation here a lot on the sift. The experience of blue is a very different one than the wavelength of 475 nm (which corresponds to blue for most people). "Light" is a subjective experience not related to real properties of photons. Photons appear bright because through the course of a billion years of evolution, interrupting photons as light, and their corresponding wavelengths as colors has better aided that animal that interrupting them as something else. But that says nothing about photons themselves, only the way in which minds are translating reality.
It is the distinction between Empiricism and Intellectualism. One believing that it takes senses to understand truth, the other, that only the power of pure reason can lead knowledge. I, for one, am mostly under the school of intellectualism as it pertains to epistemology. I trust the power of reason and logic to find truth, not eyeballs and olfactories.

No, the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon would more properly apply to colours than to light itself, which was proven by Newton to be a particle (or at least particule-like, and then later a dual particle-wave thingy of course). His conclusions were accepted by Kant, who redefined the distinction between phenomenon and noumenon to not contradict Newton's findings. Goethe disagreed with Kant and Newton, but he was a fool. He thought light and colour were the same thing thus he failed. Schopenhauer rectified Goethe's theory to apply only to the perception of colour but Goethe wouldn't have it thus he failed again and it was up to psychologists to prove Schopenhauer was actually right in a limited sense.

Your distinction of empiricism and intellectualism is also very naive. As far as we know, the only way you can prove the factuality of your knowledge is through experience. That's why modern science works and idle speculation (like most Ancient Greeks did) does not. Being an empiricist doesn't mean you "trust your eyeballs", quite the contrary in fact. That's why David Hume talks a lot of the required skepticism needed to know nature from one's senses. If we could see things as they are (as noumenon), then we would not need our senses nor our reason to interpret what they sense (the phenomenon). That's in fact the basic premise of Kant's whole Critic of Pure Reason. His solution, in a word, was to view reason as recreating it's own idea, in the original Greek sense of "form", of the original noumenon (the thing-in-itself) by interpreting the filtered sense data of phenomenon that passed through the categories of understanding (like substance, causality, etc.). Some call his solution a form psychologism and I think they are right, but Kant certainly didn't think so. In fact, I think it's not psychologistic enough, though one must be wary of going as far as to try founding everything on psychology, a circular dead end if there was one.

Ultimately, it comes to the question of what kind of knowledge you want: absolute knowledge or human knowledge? I purport absolute knowledge is unknowable (irreducible) to human knowledge in the same way the noumenon is irreducible to the phenomenon, not only by its own definition but by the very way knowledge works (at least for us, meaning in a subject-object duality where the subject cannot simply copy the object it wants to know but must make an inherently reduced image of it, i.e. an idea). I think this problem to be related to the P=NP conundrum. Only if P=NP can we ever hope to achieve absolute knowledge and then that is not even guaranteed (we would need to evolve somehow to transcend the P and NP divide which factually exists in our present human knowledge). As Scott Aaronson of the MIT puts it, "If P=NP, then the world would be a profoundly different place than we usually assume it to be. There would be no special value in “creative leaps,” no fundamental gap between solving a problem and recognizing the solution once it’s found. Everyone who could appreciate a symphony would be Mozart; everyone who could follow a step-by-step argument would be Gauss; everyone who could recognize a good investment strategy would be Warren Buffett. It’s possible to put the point in Darwinian terms: if this is the sort of universe we inhabited, why wouldn’t we already have evolved to take advantage of it?" (from his blog).

Mozart: Class Act.

thx! and since you brought this to my attention, you might as well have a listen to the rest.

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
*quality

the score is the 2nd movement from Mozart's piano concerto #23.

i just tossed it up here if you want to hear the rest.

sifted because atara posted Dinosaur Ballet which only uses the opening 40 sec, before the orchestra comes in, and i thought someone might like to hear the rest.

from the wiki:
The Piano Concerto No. 23 in A major (K. 488) is a musical composition for piano and orchestra written by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. It was finished, according to Mozart's own catalogue, on March 2, 1786, around the time of the premiere of his opera, The Marriage of Figaro. It was one of three subscription concerts given that spring and was probably played by Mozart himself at one of these.

The second, slow movement, in ternary form, is impassioned and somewhat operatic in tone. The piano begins alone with a theme characterized by unusually wide leaps. This is the only movement by Mozart in F sharp minor. The dynamics are soft throughout most of the piece. The middle of the movement contains a brighter section in A major announced by flute and clarinet that Mozart would later use to introduce the trio "Ah! taci ingiusto core!" in his opera Don Giovanni.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Ralph Macchio, guitar, talent' to 'Ralph Macchio, guitar, talent, alla turca, turkish rondo, mozart' - edited by kronosposeidon

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Diana, Damrau, opera, The, Magic, Flute, Der, Holle, Rache' to 'Diana Damrau, opera, The Magic Flute, Der Holle Rache, mozart' - edited by Deano

Excellent poetry. Made me think of one of my favorite quotations:

"Beethoven tells you what it's like to be Beethoven and Mozart tells you what it's like to be human. Bach tells you what it's like to be the universe." — Douglas Adams

Nice choice! Thank you kindly for the promote, Sir Rasch.

In reply to this comment by rasch187:
*doublepromote

and here's a translation of what she sings (second aria by the Queen Of The Night in The Magic Flute):

Hell's vengeance boils in my heart;
Death and despair, blaze around me!
If Sarastro does not feel death pains because of you,
Then you will be my daughter nevermore.
Disowned be forever,
Forsaken be forever,
Shattered be forever
All the bonds of nature
If Sarastro is not bleached because of you!
Hear, gods of vengeance, hear the mother's oath!

>> ^L0cky:

Loves Gary Oldman.


You're a Mozart fan. I love him too. I looooove Mozart! He was Austrian you know?