Talk:4'33"

Just recorded an audio version of it. --General Insineratehymn 23:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm too lazy to do it, but wouldn't it be better if the image was full of rests and had an odd time signature as well as lots of ornamentation and elaborate mood markings? 82.24.189.88 13:14, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Move to UnTunes? I mean, it does have sound, and it is a tune! --Sir OCdt Jedravent CUN UmP VFH PLS ACS WH 00:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

No, it's an article about a piece of music. In the same way an article about a book is not an unbook. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 00:29, 30 Oct 2007

Well, that's the second part only, not the larger first part. Also, we need another featured UnTune. We only have one.--Sir OCdt Jedravent CUN UmP VFH PLS ACS WH 00:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I have a thing against people stealing mainspace articles because their section of choice doesn't have enough of its own. Also, reverting something because it's not in the audio is a terribly bad attitude to have for a wiki. The articles come first, not the audio. Otherwise, maybe the article should just be protected now, to save anyone else ruining the audio? • Spang • ☃ • talk • 01:56, 31 Oct 2007

Also, the audio gets the title wrong - it's four minutes thirty-three seconds, not four thirty-three. So there! How's your precious audio now?! • Spang • ☃ • talk • 02:03, 31 Oct 2007

Disco version

Hey, I remember hearing a disco version of 4'33" on the radio back in 1978. Can anyone tell me who recorded this version? 72.209.42.92 18:33, May 31, 2010 (UTC)

The disco version was a little off-key, to be honest. I prefer the orchestral version. That orchestra is probably one of the only group of musicians who managed to play this legendary piece correctly. 73.235.91.43 (talk) 20:11, 15 March 2021 (UTC)