Wiardgroup

> Again I disagree.  Art is a form of communication.  What good 
would 
> Tolstoy have been if his novels were written only for himself?  
Of 
> what use would Mozart have been if he had locked himself in a 
closet 
> and composed music for his ears only?  Creating music for 
oneself is 
> enjoyable, but it is tantamount to aesthetic masturbation.  It 
may 
> good, but will never bear any offspring.

But they did exactly that. As it happened, the results which 
pleased them also please us. But I doubt they sat down with the 
concious intention of being "popular". Popularity is by definition, 
mediocre. You can't be "cutting edge" and popular at the same 
time because the cutting edge is that which the population has 
not caught up with yet.

Genius is assigned in retrospect, after the population has 
caught up with the artist.

  I also very much 
> appreciate being allowed to speak freely on your forum 
which--unlike 
> another forum--does not censor contrary opinions.

I make envelope generators that are also oscillators (and call 
them Envelators) it establishes that my view of reality is relatively 
pliable. I believe two sincere people can disagree, and both be 
right. The universe is large enough to contain multiple 
simultaneous realities. We should try that with our brains...