Contemporary Carioca: Technologies of mixing in a Brazilian Music Scene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frederick Moehn explores the changing social, political, economic and cultural conditions of Brazil's postdictatorship music scene.His insightful examination of Carioca (Rio de Janerio-based), music practice from the late 1990s to the middle of the following decade, explores how selected collaborators, both individually and collectively, have adapted their sonic practices to navigate socially constructed spaces.By "mixing elements of local or national cultural practices (such as timbral, textural, processual, and performative practices from forro or samba)" (105) these artists have provided an important counterbalance to the "potentially alienating or homogenizing forces of (neoliberal) globalization" (105).Moehn's examination of this relatively recent music movement (1990)(1991)(1992)(1993)(1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005) dynamically explores the narratives of identity within a process of consciously mixing and reconciling social and sonic spaces.By moving between national and international boundaries, these artists have freely transversed the regional and foreign narratives of technologies and practice, reflecting Brazil's rich cultural tradition of miscegenation and mixture -a Brazilianness; the notion that "what is most Brazilian is already mixed" (104).Moehn focuses on the creative work of Marcos Suzano, Lenine, Pedro Luis, Fernanda Abreu, and Paulinho Moska.These five Carioca musicians/producers have "facilitated the consolidation of what some observers have begun to call the Nova MPB (New MPB)" (206).The term MPB (musica popular brasileira) is an acronym which came into use by the mid-1960s.It is generally viewed as a natural evolutionary synthesis of Brazilian genres.This incubative process, primarily formed in Rio, established what many view as Brazil's "national" music.Moehn explores how this restrictive narrative created a preoccupation with a Brazilian identity largely shaped by the music critics and intellectuals of Rio and Sao Paulo, most of who catered to urban educated middle-class audiences.In this view, "the tastes of urban, educated middleclass audiences, have been guilty of giving excessive attention to bossa nova,
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".