Music-Reproducing Machines

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 11 Apr 2005 8:04 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Sweeping across the country with the speed of a transient fashion in slang or Panama hats, political war cries or popular novels, comes now the mechanical device to sing for us a song or play for us a piano, in substitute for human skill, intelligence, and soul. Only by harking back to the day of the roller skate or the bicycle craze, when sports of admitted utility ran to extravagance and virtual madness, can we find a parallel to the way in which these ingenious instruments have invaded every community in the land.

I foresee a marked deterioration in American music and musical taste, an interruption in the musical development of the country, and a host of other injuries to music in its artistic manifestations, by virtue -- or rather by vice -- of the multiplication of the various music-reproducing machines. John Philip Sousa, 1906<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bobby Lee · Post by **Bobby Lee** » 11 Apr 2005 8:07 am

Here's the complete essay.

Tom Olson · Post by **Tom Olson** » 11 Apr 2005 10:11 am

I haven't read the entire essay, but it sounds really interesting. From a quick glance, it appears that Sousa's real bone to pick was the affect of the new contraptions on copyright royalties.

To whit:

And now a word on a detail of personal interest which has a right to be heard because it voices a claim for fair play, far-reaching in its effects beyond the personal profit of one or many individuals. I venture to say that it will come as an entire surprise to almost every reader to learn that the composers of the music now produced so widely by the mechanical players of every sort draw no profit from it whatever

Ray Minich · Post by **Ray Minich** » 11 Apr 2005 11:56 am

Those with a "vested interest in the status quo" have the most reason to dislike new technology that has the potential to disrupt their paradigm.

In other words, we all dislike technology that may put us out of work.

Jon Light (deceased) · Post by **Jon Light (deceased)** » 11 Apr 2005 12:21 pm

I think congress should ban or heavily tax the Victrola.

Donny Hinson · Post by **Donny Hinson** » 11 Apr 2005 1:33 pm

Painters sure took it on the chin when photography was invented, but you never heard them whining about it!

Ca't you hear someone at the Saturday Evening Post declaring..."We don't need that Rockwell fella now, we got cameras!"

Leslie Ehrlich · Post by **Leslie Ehrlich** » 11 Apr 2005 2:27 pm

I believe that before the widespread acceptance and use of recorded music, it was much more possible to make a living as a musician.

Ken Lang · Post by **Ken Lang** » 11 Apr 2005 6:46 pm

It seems to me, at least here in America, in the 1800's the musicians were pretty much in the catagory of actors. Low on the pole and not worth much of anything.

With the advent of film and recording these folks were available to the mass of people. Thus the star was born.

Eric West · Post by **Eric West** » 11 Apr 2005 6:54 pm

Donny.

Rockwell traced photographs he set up for his most famous works. I believe all of the SEP Covers were traced works.

EJL[This message was edited by Eric West on 11 April 2005 at 08:28 PM.]

Jim Phelps · Post by **Jim Phelps** » 17 Apr 2005 4:59 pm

Well, he traced a lot better than I can.

[This message was edited by Jim Phelps on 17 April 2005 at 06:04 PM.]