Template:Yngwie malmsteen paradox capsule: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Digitalisation of data and the advances in ''information technology'' allow us to manipulate, desiccate, desecrate, defibrillate and duplicate our [[data]]. We can, in theory, handle ''any'' kind of syntactical complexity, optionality, or flexibility — if the [[algorithm]] is good enough, a machine can, instantly, ingest and process any textual construction, however denseThese are the tools we have available to us: with a simple cut-and-paste we can replicate, vary and augment at will. ''But this is not to say we should''. This we call the [[Yngwie Malmsteen paradox|Yngwie Malmsteem paradox]]; [[Nigel Tufnel]] might have called it the [[Jazz paradox]]: Just because developments in guitar technology<ref>Scalloped frets, flat radii, locking tuners, rectified amplifiers etc.</ref> and technique mean you ''can'' play 64th note flattened mixolydian arpeggios at 200 bpm ([[Yngwie Malmsteen|Yngwie]]) or whole-tone improvisations using inverted variations of the #7aug13 chord (Jazz), ''doesn’t mean you should''. <br>
Modern [[information technology]] allows us to freely manipulate, desiccate, desecrate, defibrillate and duplicate [[data]]. A good enough [[algorithm]] can, in theory, handle ''any'' kind of syntactical complexity, costlessly ingesting and processing the densest textual construction.  With a simple cut-and-paste we can replicate, vary and augment at will. But this generates what we call the [[Yngwie Malmsteen paradox]]”<ref>Spinal Tap’s [[Nigel Tufnel]] might have called it the [[Jazz paradox]]”</ref>: Just because guitar technology<ref>Scalloped frets, flat radii, locking tuners, rectified amplifiers etc.</ref> means you ''can'' play 64th note flattened mixolydian arpeggios at 200 bpm ''doesn’t mean you should''. <br>

Latest revision as of 12:05, 2 July 2019

Modern information technology allows us to freely manipulate, desiccate, desecrate, defibrillate and duplicate data. A good enough algorithm can, in theory, handle any kind of syntactical complexity, costlessly ingesting and processing the densest textual construction. With a simple cut-and-paste we can replicate, vary and augment at will. But this generates what we call the “Yngwie Malmsteen paradox[1]: Just because guitar technology[2] means you can play 64th note flattened mixolydian arpeggios at 200 bpm doesn’t mean you should.

  1. Spinal Tap’s Nigel Tufnel might have called it the “Jazz paradox
  2. Scalloped frets, flat radii, locking tuners, rectified amplifiers etc.