=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 29 Oct 1994 22:14:06 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Organization: OzEmail Pty Ltd
Subject:      Re[1]: Hi! What's This List Like?
 
Reply to message text:
 
>Hello Dan,
>welcome to the list from another Australian.  You'll also see David
>O'Donoghoe (spelling?),
 
Yes..I'm the son that Aaron Spelling never talks about - something to do with
my hygeine habits
(or lack thereof).
 
 
Regards
 
David O'Donoghoe - Spelling
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM.AU
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 29 Oct 1994 14:54:10 -0600
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         christine annette jackson <bambij@UNM.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Hi! What's This List Like?
In-Reply-To:  <m0r0m0s-000SrdC@eros.unm.edu>
 
On Fri, 28 Oct 1994, David Rodger wrote:
 
> Hello Dan,
> welcome to the list from another Australian.  You'll also see David
> O'Donoghoe (spelling?), Paul Copeland and Clive McFarlane, among others,
> who would seem to be Ozsters, too.  I mention these chaps because they're
> very vocal (or should that be literal?).
 
Welcome, Dan! (from an Albuquerquean who wishes she could at least visit
Australia:)...
 
I'm one of the non-vocal participants to this list because I so far have
only a pea-size bit of knowledge when it comes to e-music... But I
continue to read all the discussions in the hopes of some of it sinking
in! The list is great and these guys are very knowledgeable - worth sticking
around for!
 
Have fun!
 
Bambi
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 29 Oct 1994 18:46:00 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Jody Whitesides." <Amalgam@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: SMPTE and film frame rates
 
According to what I remember from film school (I graduated a few years ago),
the frame rate of 24 is what is considered standard, at least here in
American film.  I believe this is because this is the rate when film no
longer flickers during playback.  As far as when film is being shot:  24 fps
will get you the action as it happened, slower shooting speeds yield faster
motion on playback, and fast shooting speeds yield slower motion on playback.
 I don't recall the divisibility being the reason for the 24 frames.  I think
it has something to do with the measurement of the film itself.  I think each
frame is one inch in measure and is therefore measureable in our great
inches, feet, and yards, ect...  But as far as the rest of the world is
concerned I admit ignorance.
 
As far as video is concerned:  There are 30 frames a second with two fields
per frame, thus there are 60 fields a second.  This is because of the cycles
that our electricity spits out (a/c is 60 cycles a second), why, I don't
know.  Obviously this creates a transferance problem between the two media.
 So the engineers who make up the SMPTE body devised a couple of ways to may
them compatible.  There isn't one direct solution, so people choose which
they like best.  This could also be because American and European video
standards are not the same.  The 29.97 comes from the fact that 3 of the 60
fields-a-second are dropped each second during transferance.
 
I'm starting to babble so I'll let you go.  If there are more questions then
I will be happy to try and answer them.
 
Chuss!
 
Jody Whitesides
 
"It's what's played between the notes that's golden."
Amalgam@aol.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 30 Oct 1994 07:37:48 -0600
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Champagne Matthew G <mgc3295@USL.EDU>
Subject:      motion picture frame rate and flicker
 
24 frames per second is not a sufficient rate to eliminate
flicker from a mtion picture image, whichis why the
shutter in a projector interrupts the light twice each
frame, or 48 times each second. This yields a flicker-free
image.
 
By the way, the professional projectionist is a thing of the
past.
 
-Matthew Champagne, Master's candidate in music theory/comp
at USL and former part time projectionist. (mgc3295@usl.edu)
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 30 Oct 1994 17:22:44 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Michael P. Dougherty" <mdoughe@UNIX.CC.EMORY.EDU>
Subject:      A quick question
 
Hello,
 
I am new to the list, but have a question which I am hoping that some of
you e-musicians out there in e-land may be able to answer.
 
The question stems from a project in which I am currently involved on the
net, more specifically on the World Wide Web.  I am currently involved in
attempting to set up a node for music research which will, hopefully, be
able to open people around the world to music resources including library
catalogs, annotated bibliographies, and special music collections.  Of
course, music is a wonderful beast, because we need to be able to
transmit not only printed information, but also sound, and special visual
images, namely the music itself.  Thankfully, the first two of these is
taken care of.  However, other than scannable images which take up a
great deal of memory, it is difficult at the moment to send music
notation.  We have figured out that we can actually do this relatively
easily using several formats (ascii, and others) if we have a
non-licensed music font which we could make available to anyone on the
web.  This is where I am hoping that my new friends in e-land come in.
If you have any knowledge of such a beast, I would love to have any
information!!
 
Thanks
 
Michael P. Dougherty
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 30 Oct 1994 19:46:37 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         James Porter <porterj@LBM.COM>
Subject:      SoundBlaster MIDI Troubles--HELP!!
 
A friend of mine is trying to use a SoundBlaster 16 card in his
486SX machine.  He is running Norton Desktop in Windows 3.1.  Each
time he runs Windows, he gets the following message:
 
Improper MIDIPORT setting in SYSTEM.INI
 
The SoundBlaster driver in Windows is set to MIDIPORT=330 (the only
other choice is 300).  I have ensured that the SYSTEM.INI file
matches this.
 
The machine will play MIDI files through the Media Player, but not
WAV files.
 
Anyone have any suggestions?  Please reply directly.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 30 Oct 1994 18:55:08 -0800
Reply-To:     David Brewer <dbrewer@calvin.linfield.edu>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Brewer <dbrewer@CALVIN.LINFIELD.EDU>
Subject:      PAS 16 Midi Interface...
 
I am having a couple of problems with the 'built-in' midi interface on
the Pro Audio Spectrum 16 card.  First of all, whenever I use it I get a
lot of errors.  To be more specific, sometimes it sends rhythm
information but the wrong note information (so that it sounds like a kid
banging on a keyboard).  Another problem is that sometimes it will hit a
note and sustain it infinitely (so long that I eventually have to turn
off the keyboard to get the note to stop).
 
Those problems would be bad enough by themselves, but here's the REAL
problem.  When I use any MIDI software in Windows, the whole system locks
up within a few minutes.  It occurred to me that this might be an IRQ
problem, so I tried a few different settings.  On the default IRQ setting
(7), the digitized sounds and FM synthesis work fine but the external
MIDI is screwed up, and on IRQ 5 the external MIDI seems to work better
(still makes errors, but doesn't lock up) but the rest of the card goes
nuts (for example, WAV files cycle forever when played).  I tried many
other IRQ settings, but in each case I couldn't get both features to work.
 
This is driving me bonkers!  Does the PAS just have a naturally crappy
interface?  And do you think that the errors are most likely coming from
the interface or my equally cheapo keyboard? (Kawai FS780)
 
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.
 
David Brewer
dbrewer@linfield.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 18:01:25 EST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "<Clive McFarland>" <clive@PELICAN.DBE.CSIRO.AU>
Subject:      Re: A quick question
 
Michael P. Dougherty wrote:
 
[CHOMP]... it is difficult at the moment to send music
>notation.  We have figured out that we can actually do this relatively
>easily using several formats (ascii, and others) if we have a
>non-licensed music font which we could make available to anyone on the
>web.  This is where I am hoping that my new friends in e-land come in.
>If you have any knowledge of such a beast, I would love to have any
>information!!
>
Hi Michael
 
I'm not sure if this is what you're after, but the notation package Lime,
for instance, has screen and printer fonts (tufa and marl?) which are
installed (on a Mac in my case) and then allow full notation from what I
assume are ASCII-type files (I can check all this if necessary).  You may
well have already explored this possibility - they are provided free on the
demo version (available by ftp) but I don't know about any licensing
arrangement.  I can dig out the ftp site and author's email address (they
may even subscribe to this list...?) if you're interested email me.
 
Regards
 
Clive
 
Clive McFarland         CSIRO Australia         clive@pelican.dbe.csiro.au
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 16:00:42 -0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Boris BASKEVITCH <Boris.Baskevitch@INFORMATIK.FH-WOLFENBUETTEL.DE>
Subject:      New midi (CAN)
 
Hi folks,
Do you remember, i told you about the CAN network for MIDI implementation,
i have a few more things to tell you about.
 
First, there was demand for my the report of my studies on the CAN. Actually,
i made a system for this network (a tranceiver for an implementation in German
trains), and to get my degree in electrical engeneering, i had to write a report
on it, it consists in an introduction on the CAN network, a description of the
protocol, and a description of the CAN chip that i used (registers...).
Some people asked me to put this report on the net, but i don't have access to a
FTP site for writing, does anybody here has an idea to help me (and them) ?
PS. This report was written with WinWord 6 and contains embedded diagrams.
 
I'm thinking of realising an interface between the MIDI and the CAN, just to
change the physical layer of it. I may use a microcontroller with the equivalent
of a CAN chip integrated on it, Motorola are making such a chip. If I succeed
with this, i will maybe, if i have some money left and enough knowledge for it,
make a kind of simple CAN soundcard for PCs that could simulate a simple
sequencer without using the actual MIDI network but directely the CAN network.
For this, i may need some help, is there anybody on this list who could give me
some documentation on hardware implementation of MIDI ?
If my system has a future, i could (maybe) be helped by a german company
specialised in the CAN network, but this is completely unofficial.
 
Then i would like to add a few things for the advantage of the CAN :
first the price, i had some information for my system, ie : a simple CAN chip
from Philips costs not more than 6 DM ($4.5), the same with a microcontroller
should not cost over $10.
 
Joe said :
>1) Many synths do *not* simply ignore data which is meaningless to them. In an
>   overload condition, in which many, many improperly formed messages are being
>   sent, many synths crash or hang, rather than just ignoring the overruns.
>   The fact that this can happen at all points to the bottleneck being in the
>   processing and not the propagation.
With a CAN chip, the controller will only listen to the messages adressed to it,
it will not be bothered at all by other, it is possible to program the CAN chip
to send an interruption only when a message with the corresponding ID is present
on the line. This is considerabely reducing the load to the controller.
 
>The classic question when tuning the performance of any computer network
>is, "Fix the worst response time first." In the case of MIDI, that's almost
>always going to be how fast the synthesizer processes events, rather than
>how fast events can flow.
Every CAN chip will send an ack bit on the line when a message has been
succefully recieved, if the ack is not present, the sender will repeat
the message. It is to the receiver controller to send a message to tell
the sender that the previous message has been succefully processeed, if it is
critical.
 
In my implementation of MIDI in the CAN, i will not change the protocol itself
it is too difficult for me at the moment, i will just adapt it to the CAN
protocol. But if a group of persons here feel able to improve it, i would be
glad to be part of it.
PS. i'm not a real musician, i only use MIDI for fun, i'm a french technical in
industrial computer programming and electronics, on the way to be a german
engineer on computing and automatism.
 
regards, Boris
Boris.Baskevitch@Informatik.FH-Wolfenbuettel.DE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 10:57:03 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Sanielevici Alexandre <sanielea@ERE.UMONTREAL.CA>
Subject:      duplicates
 
    Hi There.
I recently subscribed to this list, and keep recieving duplicate
copies of each message coming from this list. This morning I
recieved one in triplicate, and one in octuplate. What is causing
this and how can it be corrected (other than unsubscribing, of course!)
Thanks, Alex.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 17:54:13 GMT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Steven.Bramson@JET.UK
Subject:      MIDI speed
 
Joe McMahon wrote:
 
The thing I see as a point which may be obvious to everyone by now, but
what the heck:
 
The MIDI implementation has it own problems. However, the principle
bottleneck in MIDI networks is not usually the data transfer, but the data
response. Consider:
 
1) Many synths do *not* simply ignore data which is meaningless to them. In an
   overload condition, in which many, many improperly formed messages are being
   sent, many synths crash or hang, rather than just ignoring the overruns.
   The fact that this can happen at all points to the bottleneck being in the
   processing and not the propagation.
2) Let's make an estimate, which is probably not accurate, but should be in the
   ballpark: With an ability to deliver about 31 thousand bits per second,
   a maxed-out MIDI network should be able to deliver around thirty events per
   second on 16 channels (and this is assuming 1 wire, 8-byte messages). How
   many synths can process 30 events per second in close to real-time?
 
--
 
Here is a simple experiment.  Try playing a four or five note chord with each
hand (Am7 is easy and sounds OK).  Play the same chord with both hands (on
different octaves).  Now play that 8 or 10 note chord repeatedly as fast as you
can.  I reckon 4-6 times a second is possible, so up to 60 ons and offs per
second.  Now see if
 
a) your mother keyboard keeps up ie plays all the notes every time
b) your Mac/PC/Amiga/Atari MIDI can record that fast
c) any instruments down the line can keep up
 
I reckon there is probably something faster than MIDI between the mother
keyboard and its internal tone generators.
 
Steven.Bramson@jet.uk
 
PS on the subject of minor seventh cords, try playing Fm7 with your left hand
and Cm7 with your right hand together.  Then try Cm7 on the left and Fm7 on the
right.  Same notes but different octaves, yet to my ears, one sounds nice, the
other sounds a bit of a mess (I won't say which way round so as not to bias
your listening).  Any suggestions as to why?
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 17:37:48 GMT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Steven.Bramson@JET.UK
Subject:      Re: PAS 16 Midi Interface
 
David Brewer writes
 
{tale of woe with intermittent faults and IRQ swapping omitted}
 
This is driving me bonkers!  Does the PAS just have a naturally crappy
interface?  And do you think that the errors are most likely coming from
the interface or my equally cheapo keyboard? (Kawai FS780)
 
--
 
Yes, I find similar problems with the PAS-16 MIDI.  Before I bought my PAS-16 I
bought an MPU-401 clone card.  This works perfectly with everything being a
hardware level compatible implementation rather than a UART mode only setup as
found on most general PC sound cards.  However I have had some problems with
Cubase Score if I have both interfaces plugged in.  I came to the coclusion some
time ago that there is no such thing as compatible.  I am beginning to think
that one should buy separate
 
- MIDI card
- External MIDI module for music generation
- WAV file play and record card
- SCSI card
 
rather than all in one almost but not quite compatible.  Saying that, the
MPU-401 uses the same default i/o address (330) as the Adaptec range of SCSI
cards.  So much for plug and play!
 
Steven.Bramson@jet.uk
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 13:51:44 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe Grossman <grossmj@SPOT.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject:      Re: MIDI speed
In-Reply-To:  <01HIXEF1SA8G000CWQ@VAXF.COLORADO.EDU>
 
My guess would be, if you dislike the sound of the Cm7 in the bottom and
the Fm7 on top, is the minor 9th interval between the G and the A-flat.
                                                                Joe G.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 16:59:37 EST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jason Price <jason_price@CC.CRANBROOK.EDU>
Subject:      Audio VS. Digital
 
          To all Emusic-L subscribers:
 
          I am currently faced with the problem of buying new
          multi-track recording equip.  I am making a MAJOR
          investment, and don't want to blow a shit-load of money on
          someting that I will wish I hadn't done in a year or so.
          The two basic systems that I have come across that have
          really cought my attention are Tascam's DA-88 (8 track
          digital multitrack recorder) and an older Tascam
          Reel-to-Reel Analog 8 track Recorder.  The Reel-to-Reel is
          about $1,000 cheaper, but for that much, I can get a good
          two track recorder to master down to.  The feature about the
          DA-88 that I really like, is the fact that it has an
          internal card that records SMPTE time code and it doesn't
          have to waste a valuable track on your Multi-Track.  I have
          heard various things about both Digital and Audio equipment
          that make it so confusing to pick one that will provide
          great audio quality and won't become out-dated anytime soon.
           If anyone has any expierience or advise on which piece of
          equipment I should go for, I would like to hear it.
 
          THANX
 
 
          ------------------------------------------------------------
            Jason Price
            jason_price@cc.cranbrook.edu
            Bloomfield Hills, MI, USA
          ------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 15:17:06 -0800
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Andre Smirnov <asmir@CCRMA.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Russian Electroacoustic Music
 
Andre Smirnov
Director of the Theremin Center for Electroacoustic Music
at Moscow Conservatory of Music will present a LECTURE:
 
HISTORY AND PRESENT OF THE  RUSSIAN ELECTROACOUSTIC MUSIC
 
Wednesday, November 2 at 1:15 pm
 
in the Knoll Ballroom at the Center for Computer Research in Music
and Acoustics (CCRMA)
The Knoll, 660 Lomita Drive, Stanford University Campus
 
 
In the lecture  will be briefly mentioned some important but unknown
historical facts regarding the work of Russian inventors Leon
Theremin, Evgeny Murzin and Andrey Volodin in 20 - 60-s in
conjunction  with the recent situation in Russian electroacoustic
music and activities of the Theremin Center for Electroacoustic Music
with demonstration of video and music examples.
 
CONCERT OF RUSSIAN ELECTROACOUSTIC MUSIC
 
Thursday, November 3  at 4:00pm in the Knoll Ballroom.
 
1. Eduard Artemiev - I would like to returne  12:00
2. Albina Stoianova - Biriulki   8:30
 
3. Jorge Campos - Yaravi for flute, percussion and tape  11:30
 
Break
 
4. Aleksander Ponomariov/Valery Beluntsov/Andre Smirnov -
 
   Mrs. Lenine    15:00
Text-sound composition on the texts by Russian futurist poet
 
Velimir Khlebnikov "Gospozha Lenine" (1909-1912)
5. Vladimir Nikolaev - Echolalia for two fluts and tape   11:00
6. Vladimir Volkov - Portrait of Marina for flute and tape  12:00
 
for information and directions call 415 723-4971.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 19:04:03 -0500
Reply-To:     "L Mccoy (GD 1999)" <mcco5@minerva.cis.yale.edu>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "L Mccoy (GD 1999)" <mcco5@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
Subject:      computer music conference
 
All subscribers:
 
 
I don't know if you have already been advised (since I joined the list
quite recently) but there is a conference entitled "Technology and the
Composer" which will be held at the University of Maryland (College Park)
from Nov.10-12.
 
Much good music.  Otto Laske will be there, as will Jean-Claude Risset
and Joji (sp?) Yuasa.  It should be a wonderful time to hear music and
discuss 'things'.
 
 
Hope to see some of you there!
 
Scott McCoy
mcco5@minerva.cis.yale.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 19:11:44 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Wesley Felteau <wfelteau@ST6000.SCT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Audio VS. Digital
In-Reply-To:  <9410312239.AA34306@st6000.sct.edu> from "Jason Price" at Oct 31,
              94 04:59:37 pm
 
Get an Alesis ADAT or a Fostex "adat".
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 31 Oct 1994 23:31:21 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         john rossi <jrossi@BGNET.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Audio VS. Digital
In-Reply-To:  <199410312339.SAA29913@falcon.bgsu.edu>
 
I believe that the most practical reason for choosing digital over analog
when it comes to 8-tracks is the size and the expense of the media.
People can argue till they are blue in the face about the relative
benefits of analog and digital and which sounds better, etc.  In reality,
however, the differences, if they exist in reality, are small.
Generally, I would have to believe that in order to compete with digital,
you would need at least a 1/2" 8-track deck and some kind of noise
reduction (dbx or Dolby s (or whatever the new Dolby is)).  Here is my
point.. A 40 min reel of decent analog 1/2" tape will cost you about
$30-$40 (with a hub) and it will occupy a box which is about 1'x 1' and
about 1" thick and which will weigh a couple pounds.  Contrast this to a
8mm tape which holds 100 min of audio, and is just slightly larger than
an audio cassette.  Even ADAT's S-VHS format is a hell of a lot handier
and less expensive than 1/2" analog.
 
John 3
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 16:29:56 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
Hi folks,
 
I want a system which I can
send audio down  in real time and use  that as a modulation source for
my new hypothetical digital modular system. This isn't going to happen
until we go optical.
 So said Ab.
 
Does this mean sending this mod source audio along the same line as purely
control information?  If so, EVERYTHING will have to be sent with headers
to indicate what it is: control info, audio, sample data, whatever.  I
suppose that the status bytes of MIDI are like little headers which identify
the data to follow.  But then sysex and sample data is similarly headed, but
often occurs in longer datastreams, and not during real-time performance.
(Yes, I know there are sequencers out there which willl send sysex.  I'm
thinking more of sysex dumps here.)  If you wanted to retain real-time
performance inforamtion, then there would have to be an agreed way of
fragmenting the longer datastreams to maintain the timing of other types
of information.
 
Am I on the right track here?  More knowledgable people out there can correct
me or explain this better than me!
 
>My cheapo consummer
CD player has an optical output.
 
Yes, and most pundits out there thhink that TOSlink stinks (for audio and
other reasons), which probably explains why companies like Wadia prefer the
AT&T glass fiber interface for their gear.  In fact, even SP/DIF is better
on coaxial cable than TOSlink, and _that's_ over short runs.
 
>you  can  bet that  the very first
third  party    products to  emerge   will  be   <insert  name of  new
protocal>->midi converters
 
Yes.
 
>As for getting your old  gear to do all the  nice things that the  new
standard could do - tuff shit what do you expect.
 
I don't think anyone was suggesting that a new protocol would give old gear
new capabilities.  That isn't true even with plain ol' MIDI; remember the
MIDI implementation on the DX7s (xmit ch. 1 only, rx omni mode only) ?
I think people's concerns are for backwards compatibility, a point on which
you already offered a solution (third-party interfaces).
 
I think it's worth remembering that MIDI was made at a time when parallel
high-speed interfaces were more difficult and expensive to implement.  We
tend to forget how quickly things have progressed.  How many reading this
were using the internet ten years ago?
 
Regards, David.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 16:46:48 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Synth redundancy & sound in general
 
Hello everyone,
what an  interesting discussion this has been.  A few things occur to me.
 
When audio recordings didn't exist, or least weren't the most common way of
disributing musical ideas or works, musicians and composers relied on a
generally agreed standard for notating (making a record of) them.  This
implies that during that time, musical works were not properly finished
and would only be when performers reconstituted them in aural form.
 
Now, we can record (store, archive,...) completed works.  In fact, the
currency of audio recordings has been most raised by the popular music
industry, through which songs/pieces/works are intimately associated with
a particular artist/writer/producer.
 
Yet, the ease with which are able to do this also means that infinite versions
of the same ideas can also be propagated.  This is often encouraged; witness
the proliferation of records with multiple remixes and products like CD-ROMs
(such as Peter Gabriel's) which allow re-mixing of the song.
 
So, we have to ask ourselves, how closely _can_ we control the sounds through
which our ideas are expressed.  Well, I'll leave you all to ponder this and
also through another spanner in the works by suggesting that the answer has
always been "Not very well at all."  We have always been at the mercy of
different (inadequate or adequate) of signal processors, recoding technologies,
(sorry, 'recording') and reproduction systems which different people use.
That bandwidth-limited, dynamic range-limited, cheapie AM radio receiver with
a 3 inch speaker probably affects the sound more than a slight tweak on
the modulation amount on carrier 3 in  a DX7!
 
Thanks for the debate,
David.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 11:13:12 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         joe dierker <jade@VT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Synth redundancy & sound in general
 
>
>Yet, the ease with which are able to do this also means that infinite versions
>of the same ideas can also be propagated.  This is often encouraged; witness
>the proliferation of records with multiple remixes and products like CD-ROMs
>(such as Peter Gabriel's) which allow re-mixing of the song.
>
>So, we have to ask ourselves, how closely _can_ we control the sounds through
>which our ideas are expressed.  Well, I'll leave you all to ponder this and
>also through another spanner in the works by suggesting that the answer has
>always been "Not very well at all."  We have always been at the mercy of
>different (inadequate or adequate) of signal processors, recoding technologies,
>(sorry, 'recording') and reproduction systems which different people use.
 
        For a well-anthologized if kinda old (though hardly square) view,
check out Walter Benjamin's "Art in the age of mechanical reproduction"...
[In _Illuminations_]...
 
 
                                                        Joe Dierker.
                                                        jade@vt.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 17:19:01 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Nasty guitar sounds from a synth?
 
>(we have all signed a Just Say No To Chiffy Kalimba
>pledge for all future projects, you'll be happy to learn).
 
I didn't sign *nuffin'*.
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 17:26:34 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Timbral notation and extreme reactions to music
 
>(anyone remember the back covers of albums
>by M. Frog Labat, Tangerine Dream, and Klaus Schulze, tht depicted
>their bizarre notations on graph paper?).
 
I have BLACKDANCE and TIMEWIND which have Klaus's notation (in English,
interestingly). I use something similar, but I don't represent the sounds
graphically; instead I tend to use horizontal for time, vertical for pitch,
and will describe imagery in prose. The main reason for doing this is to
get some sense of temporal structure, some sense of orchestrational
development, and to make notes on MIDI assignments, effects settings, and
so on.
 
I didn't know that TD did anything like this; on the Ohr record sleeves
perhaps? One thing I did notice is that the latest (yawn) Virgin best-of
boxed set has excerpts called "Tangram (Puzzle Part)", "Rubycon (Dice
Part)", "Logos (Velvet Part)" and so on, which gives some insights into the
imagery, assuming the annotations are theirs to begin with.
 
>Which means that our music may in
>fact be the first to be rendered unrepeatable....
 
This discussion has come up before, and I think I was accused of some form
of elitism for not wanting to make the effort to make my music notated and
performable in some general sense. As Mike would say, "Feh."
 
>she claims, and I have
>independently proven in blind studies, that anything he's ever
>recorded instantly gives her a headache, regardless of playback
>volume.
 
I have one (1) authentic New Age album, a Californian solo-artist
contemporary piano thing which I have not managed to listen to right to the
end. It gives me a headache and makes me twitchy. I have no problem with
some quite heavy and noisy music (not to mention Schnittke), but this one
just puts me on edge...
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 17:28:36 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Live sequencing
 
>My
>approach has been to say that I know how much my brain and hands can
>do at any one time, and I know how much music is needed to fill out an
>arrangement that sounds good. If A < B, I am doing my audience a
>disservice by not providing them with the missing bits somehow.
 
True; I guess that my motivation is to strive for A=B somehow, by a
combination of reducing B (which is good for me: in the past I've been
tempted to over-orchestrate or over-sequence, and I'm after sparseness) and
increasing A:
 
>I
>suppose I could learn to play more and faster, and to redefine my
>style to allow for everything to be done live with two hands and two
>feet, but what will my audiences listen to while I'm relearning how to
>present my music?
 
Well, true, but it's possible to get there reasonably quickly with some
perseverance. Let me think ... For a gig in early 1993 I had Performer
doing some backing, with live stuff routed through MAX, but that included a
5-minute opening sequence which was just an interaction with MAX "tape
loops", and a five-minute closing sequence which was totally manual. By
December I'd managed a gig without a sequencer and without a keyboard, just
using MAX and the Peavey fader box.
 
The trick, of course, is to have some way of performing orchestrations,
either by making the orchestrations minimal, or by thinking a LOT about the
interactive systems. And of course, one still has to make some value
judgement about what counts as "sequenced" anyway (Wavestation wave
sequences? Arpeggios? Sampled drum rhythms?). But, for me anyway, I'm
convinced that this is the way to go: the creative tensions and discipline
feel right. It's still hard, though, and I'm not happy with the results so
far. Maybe in a year or so...
 
Oh yeah, another angle on this: what better way for finding ideas than to
improvise into orchestrational performance systems? I guess this is the
Vangelis philosophy.
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 14:23:11 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         john rossi <jrossi@BGNET.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
In-Reply-To:  <199410212123.RAA06966@falcon.bgsu.edu>
 
Actually, the K2000s does have an optical interface as well as two
cabeled digital interfaces (SPDIF and whatever the pro one is called).
 
John 3
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 14:29:34 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         john rossi <jrossi@BGNET.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Nasty guitar sounds from a synth?
In-Reply-To:  <199410221623.MAA05966@falcon.bgsu.edu>
 
On Sat, 22 Oct 1994, Nick Rothwell wrote:
 
> >(we have all signed a Just Say No To Chiffy Kalimba
> >pledge for all future projects, you'll be happy to learn).
>
> I didn't sign *nuffin'*.
>
 
I rather like the sound of a well played Chiffy Kalimba, actually.
 
John 3
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 14:59:50 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         john rossi <jrossi@BGNET.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Timbral notation and extreme reactions to music
In-Reply-To:  <199410221638.MAA07062@falcon.bgsu.edu>
 
Back when I was playing with Pascal Languirand in the mid 70s, we learned
very early on that we needed some sort of notation for the synth parts so
that drummers and bass players would be able to cue.  Back then my synth
parts were quite etherial and were really more timbrally and
amplitudinally dynamic than they were melodic (March of the Plastic Ants
being an exception, BTW).  This, of course, was because all I had were
monophonic (duophonic in case of the EML-101) synths.  Also, my Synthi
AKS got most of the organizational work and anybody who has ever worked
with EMS equipment (especially with a sequencer not controlling pitch)
can realize how hard it would be to articulate the sound comming out in
order to explain where things go to a drummer.
 
We adopted a notation system which was similar to Klaus Schulze's but
used independent staves for frequency and timbre where the timbral
dynamics were drawn with continuous lines with beginnings on the staff at
points approximetly equal to the principal harmonic (i.e., filter
frequency and resonance point) and an opening and closing right faced
(i.e., <) acute angle extending and following the contour of the harmonic
content.  So, for example, a standard filter sweep would be anotated as a
blunted A-frame hut.  The degree of resonance was indicated by filling in
the 'triangle' with shades of grey.  For very high resonance settings the
'floor' would not be indicated just the vector of the filter frequency
(i.e., the roof of the hut) in a bolder ink line.  When superimposed on a
standard musical notation staff, it was easy to cue things to the
changing harmonic content.  For example, if a drummer was to start
playing at the beginning of a bar which occurred in time at a point about
two thirds through a filtered sweep of white noise then the point on the
drum notation would coincide with a point about 2/3 through the sweep
notation.
 
The only real problem was that Pascal was the only drummer we ever used
who could read this stuff.  Since he was generally playing a guitar or
synth it meant that one of us had to cue the drummer anyway (ambient
music is a real hard thing to count, if you think about it).  Actually,
it didn't matter since by looking at the notation we would know when
things were supposed to start and could cue them manually.
 
I think I still have some of the notation around from that period.  I'll
need to remember to look for it.
 
John 3
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 23 Oct 1994 10:02:17 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Organization: OzEmail Pty Ltd
Subject:      Re[1]: Synth Redundancy?
 
Reply to message text:
 
 
>It would probably be good enough for my purposes if I could get a sound
>on one synth that was reasonably close to one I had on another, but I
>don't consider myself a Synthesist, primarily. But I can imaginge that
>the many people on this list who spend hours upon hours tweaking a patch
>until it's just so are not going to be satisfied with 'reasonably close'
>or 'almost'.
 
I guess that if one wants to capture their music snap frozen with every nuance
and controller change intact, the only answer is to record to CD (or
Equivalent). But is change necessarily a bad thing? David Bowie has used many
different musicians to play his music in a live context, different musicians
indeed than played on the records..so we can expect the 'live' versions to
sound different from the record- does this make the music inferior? Perhaps
this is part of what makes live music an interesting experience- its
unpredictability.
 
I remember a piece of music I did that included a crappy little Casio keyboard
as one of the 'layers' in the main synth drone.
I have subsequently reworked it on other equipment, and BOTH versions have
their own appeal.
Yes, it IS unrealistic to expect that you can synthesize EXACTLY tha same
sounds on different equipment,
but thats OK! (IMHO)
 
Regards
 
David O'Donoghoe
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 22 Oct 1994 10:50:58 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Oliver Scheel <os@HANNIBAL.LU.PFALZ.DE>
Organization: Private UUCP site, Ludwigshafen, FRG
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
>Isn't it about time that boring old serial MIDI is scrapped and replaced by
>a faster, parallel link with a wide data bus?
 
Perhaps. But the problem is not the MIDI speed. The synths are often too
slow to prozess the messages in time and if this isn't fixed before it
would be idiotic to create a new MIDI standard.
 
btw: I would prefer a serial link (it's much cheaper!) like ethernet. It's
fast enough to transmit simple MIDI data and even fast enough (1MBit/s) to
transfer simple audio data ...
 
Oliver
 
--
Oliver Scheel, Mundenheimer Str. 254, D-67061 Ludwigshafen (Germany)
phone: ++49 621 5296890 -- email: os@hannibal.lu.pfalz.de
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 23 Oct 1994 14:13:27 -0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Boris BASKEVITCH <Boris.Baskevitch@INFORMATIK.FH-WOLFENBUETTEL.DE>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Fri,
              21 Oct 94 12:31:40 PDT."
              <199410230210.DAA19889@MAIL.FH-Wolfenbuettel.DE >
 
As a different bus for a new MIDI, i would like to propose the CAN.
The CAN (Controller Area Network) is is a message-oriented protocol
wich was designed to interconnect microcontrollers in car and industry
There are actually many supports for the data, (optical, ...) but a very
simple one a the line pair.
All the controllers are sychronised, there are no master/slave (multimaster
bus structure), that's why I thought of using it for a MIDI replacement.
The messages are basically composed of an ID (up to 2032) wich determines
the priority of the message (may be useful for MIDI), and the data itself
(0 to 8 bytes).
The transmission time is programmable (clock), the error detection/correction
is quite powerful, possibility of non-destructive bit-wise arbitration.
The CAN network follows the CSMA/CD protocol wich means more clearly that
if there is detection of a collision, the CAN chip takes in account the
priority of the messages and delays the messages.
 
I'm currently working on this network in Germany, so if anyone needs more
information on it, I will be glad to contact him/her.
 
PS. please excuse my english, I'm french, and I'm working in Germany, so I may
    mix a little bit.
 
Boris
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boris.Baskevitch@Informatik.FH-Wolfenbuettel.DE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 23 Oct 1994 11:54:19 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
>Isn't it about time that boring old serial MIDI is scrapped and replaced by
>a faster, parallel link with a wide data bus?
 
Wide data bus? You obviously haven't seen the inside of my rack cases.
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 23 Oct 1994 11:55:24 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
>Better yet, fiber.
 
Too fragile. (Have you seen what roadies do with cables? Have you ever
tried soldering fibre?)
 
>Maybe TCP/IP or
>something close.
 
Not realtime.
 
>(How would you like to be reading this on your synthesizer
>instead of your computer?  :-)
 
"A:88 MUL [IDONTTHINKSO]"
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 23 Oct 1994 22:53:31 MYT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Victor Voo <victor@SHINE.PC.MY>
Organization: Sunshine Audio & Video Productions
Subject:      Video - Shaping Your Sound
 
I live in Malaysia, a country literally on the other side of the
world, which makes 800 numbers inaccessible.  I would appreciate
it if someone could call First Light Video Publishing at:
 
    1-800-777-1576
 
and ask them for their FAX number and post it to me or this list.
I am interested to get their training video tape entitled
"SHAPING YOUR SOUND" at US$ 99.95 for use as a training tool for
my church sound system operators (about 20 of them).  Also, if
anyone has bought this set of videos, it would be great if you
could post your comments on it.
 
Thanks.
--
 =======================================================================
VICTOR VOO - Sunshine Audio & Video Productions :)
Fax   : (International Access Code)-60-3-9304611   Voice : 60-3-9301842
Email : victor@shine.pc.my
 =======================================================================
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 23 Oct 1994 13:38:11 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Keith C. Perry" <perrykc@DUNX1.OCS.DREXEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
>> Isn't it about time that boring old serial MIDI is scrapped and replaced by
>> a faster, parallel link with a wide data bus?
>
>Better yet, fiber...
 
 
True, and that wouldn't be hard to do :)  Someone here are Drexel is
working on that... :)
 
 
 
===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===
                                              \/
Keith C. Perry 800-836-4599                   /\
       ______________________                 \/ "To be or not to be...
Owner, >Studio K Productions<                 /\
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^                 \/     THAT AIN'T A QUESTION"
                &                             /\
Floor Supervisor / Senior Consultant          \/
Drexel University Office of Computing Services--|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
...
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 13:06:35 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Organization: OzEmail Pty Ltd
Subject:      Re[1]: Synth Redundancy?
 
Reply to message text:
 
 
>It's not so  much  tweaking a patch  so  that  it's just so   but more
>setting it up so that it responds in certain (often very bizarre) ways
>to performance  controls.  Thats   the real   problem with  trying  to
>recreate a lost sound jst from the midi track.
 
>        Ab.
 
Absolutely.
I remember assigning both pitch (with a two octave range) and transwave loop
point to the modulation wheel of a VFX-SD.
I wouldnt like to try and recreate the same sound on my JV-80! But thats OK, If
I decided to rework that piece of music I would do another sound which doesnt
sound quite the same, or respond to the controller message in the same way, but
would sound quite cute in its own right- and appropriate to the piece.
 
Regards
 
DAVID O'DONOGHOE
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM.AU
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 13:06:41 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Organization: OzEmail Pty Ltd
Subject:      Re: Synth Redundancy?
 
Reply to message text:
 
 
> remixing the same sequence with other machines leads to odd results.
 
'Odd' can be good!
 
>. He sent effects settings, a SMF, even patch data and
>a tape of his mix; we didn't get anywhere near it in the end.
 
Goes to show that no matter how much experience we've had, and/or how clever we
are,
we are STILL at the mercy of our machines to a point (amongst other dark forces
such as our current emotional state, which can ALSO be influenced by our
machines!)
 
 
DAVID O"DONOGHOE
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM.AU
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 23 Oct 1994 20:07:10 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: Nasty guitar sounds from a synth?
In-Reply-To:  <199410221826.LAA02225@mail.netcom.com> from "john rossi" at Oct
              22, 94 02:29:34 pm
 
john rossi writes--
>
>On Sat, 22 Oct 1994, Nick Rothwell wrote:
>
>> >(we have all signed a Just Say No To Chiffy Kalimba
>> >pledge for all future projects, you'll be happy to learn).
>>
>> I didn't sign *nuffin'*.
>>
>
>I rather like the sound of a well played Chiffy Kalimba, actually.
>
>John 3
 
Mutiny! MUTINY! Tie the scurvy dogs to the yardarm! Arrrr! :)
 
 
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I've had some beautiful women melt my heart...Now a Chroma is melting it."
                                                                  (r. fahl)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 14:46:25 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Controller Area Network
 
Hi folks,
recently, Boris wrote:
>The CAN (Controller Area Netwrok is a message-oriented protocol
>which was designed to interconnect microcontrollers...
>All the controllers are synchronised, there are no master/slave (multimaster
bus structure)...
 
So, if you're wanting to use this for MIDI-like communications, how do you
implement any kind of master/slave relationship, e.g. synth responding to
sequencer's messages?
 
>The messages are basically composed of an ID (upto 2032)...
 
Odd number.  I guess this is how you do the master/slave thang.  Sequencer
sends messages of ID nnnn and synth is programmed to respond to messages of
ID nnnn.
 
Sounds fascinating.  Tell us more, please!
 
Regards, David.
<musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au>
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 12:37:32 +0200
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "A. Fiorletta" <ccd505@CCD.UTOVRM.IT>
Subject:      chord recognition
 
I'm doing a software real time arranger...
Does any one know about algoritms for chord recognition (how they work),
or can tell me where i can read something about?
Thank you, Alessandro Fiorletta
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 09:52:37 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Kevan L. Moore" <kevan@MX6.MSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      BOSE acoustic wave
 
Hello all.
 
        Anybody out there using a BOSE acoustic wave for
        their equipment?
 
        How well does it work?
        Any problems?
        Is it LOUD enough?
        Is it portable enough?
 
any comments welcome.
 
 
Thanks.
 
kevan
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 17:09:45 -0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Boris BASKEVITCH <Boris.Baskevitch@INFORMATIK.FH-WOLFENBUETTEL.DE>
Subject:      Re: Controller Area Network
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Mon,
              24 Oct 94 14:46:25 +1000."
              <199410240448.FAA04143@MAIL.FH-Wolfenbuettel.DE >
 
David asked how to implement a master/slave relationship with the CAN,
This kind of relationship is implemented by the message identifieres (as
you guessed). For example, a sequencer (with the highest priority) is Id'd
number 0, it sends a request (a note) to an expander ID'd number 1 (lower
priority). The other controllers (synth...) may or may not listen to the
message, depending if they are ID'd number 1 or not.
 
I would like to add that each message has a variable lengh(t) of 0 (just for
synchronisation) to 8 byte (that could code any kind of modulation of the
note)
 
I remember that somebody said that synth. would not be intelligent enough
to control such a network, as an answer, I would like to say that the CAN
network is supported by single chips (from Philips or Intel) that handle
the whole protocol.
 
Boris
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boris Baskevitch,   for a new MIDI
Boris.Baskevitch@Informatik.FH-Wolfenbuettel.DE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 08:05:04 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: Timbral notation and extreme reactions to music
In-Reply-To:  <199410221635.JAA17165@mail.netcom.com> from "Nick Rothwell" at
              Oct 22, 94 05:26:34 pm
 
Nick Rothwell writes--
>
>>(anyone remember the back covers of albums
>>by M. Frog Labat, Tangerine Dream, and Klaus Schulze, tht depicted
>>their bizarre notations on graph paper?).
>
>I have BLACKDANCE and TIMEWIND which have Klaus's notation (in English,
>interestingly). I use something similar, but I don't represent the sounds
>graphically; instead I tend to use horizontal for time, vertical for pitch,
>and will describe imagery in prose. The main reason for doing this is to
>get some sense of temporal structure, some sense of orchestrational
>development, and to make notes on MIDI assignments, effects settings, and
>so on.
 
I used to do very intricate drawings on graph paper, with lines denoting
timeflow and breakpoints and shadings and curves for timbre. Now that I
do most work on a sequencer, I find its graphic abilities overshadowing
mine and changing how I work.
 
>I didn't know that TD did anything like this; on the Ohr record sleeves
>perhaps?
 
Yep. When you come visiting next, remind me to show you the inner gatefold
sleeve of "alpha centauri".
 
>One thing I did notice is that the latest (yawn) Virgin best-of
>boxed set has excerpts called "Tangram (Puzzle Part)", "Rubycon (Dice
>Part)", "Logos (Velvet Part)" and so on, which gives some insights into the
>imagery, assuming the annotations are theirs to begin with.
 
Big assumption.
 
>>Which means that our music may in
>>fact be the first to be rendered unrepeatable....
>
>This discussion has come up before, and I think I was accused of some form
>of elitism for not wanting to make the effort to make my music notated and
>performable in some general sense. As Mike would say, "Feh."
 
Me? Never! Libel! Slander!
 
>I have one (1) authentic New Age album, a Californian solo-artist
>contemporary piano thing which I have not managed to listen to right to the
>end. It gives me a headache and makes me twitchy. I have no problem with
>some quite heavy and noisy music (not to mention Schnittke), but this one
>just puts me on edge...
 
Feh! Oops.
 
 
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How does it sound? Well, if jackhammers could sing...." (d. a. c. crowell)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 10:10:44 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Bob Crispen <crispen@EIGHT-BALL.HV.BOEING.COM>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
Arne Claassen ISE <claassen@EBS330.EB.UAH.EDU> sez:
 
>The problem with something like TCP/IP is that it is a packet system, while
>MIDI requires real-time continous data flow.
 
Let me expand on that for a minute.  The trouble with TCP/IP is that
(a) it's the wrong level of protocol, and (b) it tells you stuff you
don't want to know.
 
To take the second first, TCP/IP requires a handshake between the
parties to a virtual connection between machines.  Before the
originating machine can send the next packet, the receiving machine
has got to acknowledge receipt of the packet.  After a period of
time (always at least several seconds) if a packet isn't acknowledged,
it's re-sent.
 
Now think about that for a minute.  Let's say your receiving machine
misses a note-on.  If you were using TCP/IP, no problem -- you'll
probably get that note-on 10 seconds later!
 
The point is, if you get back an error message, or failure to acknowledge
a message, what can you do with it that won't make things worse?
 
What can you do with the concept of a virtual connection that won't
make things worse?  Well, perhaps you can have module B respond if
module A is shut down.  That's kinda cool.  But if you have a module
that only plays on the last song of a 2-hour set, would you want to
have its connection time out?  How would you prevent that?
 
Worse, every non-functional message such as an acknowledgement is a
message just the same as a note-on command message when you think about
bus contention.  If you think it's a pain having a live keyboard and a
sequencer talking to the same MIDI module on the same channel now, just
imagine what it would be like with every MIDI module sending back an
acknowledgement to a sequencer for every note!
 
Finally, MIDI is at *highest* a MAC-level (Media Access Control
level) protocol.  And that's just the right level.  MIDI doesn't have
the problems of managing error correction because it doesn't *have*
error correction.  It doesn't have the problem of managing connections,
routing, or level of service because the standard doesn't know about
and doesn't care about those things.
 
As a result, it's cheap.  A $29.95 toy can have some sort of MIDI
interface.  As a purchaser of FDDI boards from time to time, I know
that a more complicated substitute for MIDI would add hundreds of
dollars to the price of every synth, effects module, and MMC device.
And that's liable to stay the case for a long time, since there aren't
enough musicians to underwrite the expense of the development of the
MIDI equivalent of the Protocol Engine or even the LANCE chip.
+-------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rev. Bob "Bob" Crispen        | Music should not be held responsible |
| crispen@foxy.hv.boeing.com    |   for the people who listen to it.   |
+-------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 08:09:13 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: Timbral notation and extreme reactions to music
In-Reply-To:  <199410221857.LAA06501@mail.netcom.com> from "john rossi" at Oct
              22, 94 02:59:50 pm
 
john rossi writes--
>
>Back when I was playing with Pascal Languirand in the mid 70s, we learned
>very early on that we needed some sort of notation for the synth parts so
>[...really nifty description deleted...]
>I think I still have some of the notation around from that period.  I'll
>need to remember to look for it.
 
We all ought to scan this stuff and upload it to the archives so people
can see examples of this sort of work; maybe bootleg the Schulze and
TD art, some Stockhausen graphic scores etc.? I mean, there's an art
gallery of old synths on Analog Heaven's Web page....
 
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How does it sound? Well, if jackhammers could sing...." (d. a. c. crowell)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 13:15:32 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stefan Scheffler <stefan@MMS-GMBH.DE>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
>The problem with something like TCP/IP is that it is a packet system, while
>MIDI requires real-time continous data flow. I'd suggested SCSI a year
>ago but got shot down for the same reason, in addition that it only has
>7 nodes...
Think about its successor FireWire, it will implement beside stream
channels realtime capable channels. As far as I know it will support
several billion devices on the same line :-). Since it will come very soon
it might be a good opportunity to jump on this for a new MIDI.
 
Ciao,
  Stefan
 
<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 12:41:52 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Macalester College Music Department <FORNER@MACALSTR.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Nasty guitar sounds from a synth?
In-Reply-To:  Your message dated "Sat,
              22 Oct 1994 14:29:34 -0400" <01HIKUD0LHWYAFVLDI@MACALSTR.EDU>
 
> On Sat, 22 Oct 1994, Nick Rothwell wrote:
>
> > >(we have all signed a Just Say No To Chiffy Kalimba
> > >pledge for all future projects, you'll be happy to learn).
> >
> > I didn't sign *nuffin'*.
> >
>
> I rather like the sound of a well played Chiffy Kalimba, actually.
>
> John 3
 
Particularly in B Flat minor
 
ef
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 23 Oct 1994 10:11:07 PM
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stephen Travis Pope <stp@CNMAT.CNMAT.BERKELEY.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Cypher availability
In-Reply-To:  elad ophir <eo536318@ccsf.cc.ca.us>'s letter of: 94 Oct 21
 
The LISP source code for Cypher is included on a CD-ROM with the book
"Interactive Music Systems" by Robert Rowe, MIT Press, 1992.
 
stp
 
___Stephen Travis Pope
___Editor, Computer Music Journal, MIT Press
___Center for New Music and Audio Technology
___Dept. of Music, U. C. Berkeley
___stp@CNMAT.Berkeley.edu, (+1-510) 644-3881
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 21 Oct 1994 23:48:30 +6816
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Steven.Bramson@JET.UK
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
Well it is a while since we had the last interesting discussion on this
topic.  I recall extravagant claims for firewire, although a few months ago I
saw a learned article about the technology which looks very interesting.
Here are my thoughts:
 
Obvious problems
 
- 16 channels is too few and can be sucked up by one expander, so you need
  to change the protocol
- MIDI sample damps are slow, so you need to use uprated hardware
 
Use ethernet.
 
- Both interface and cables are cheap and widely available.
- The cable is reasonably robust.
- You can go a long way (twice round a large stage).
- 10 Mbits is 300 times faster than 30 kbits.
- It may not be a real time point to point link, but that shouldn't matter
  if it is fast enough, and it is.
 
Addressing
 
- Every synth gets a unique ethernet address.
- Allow 65,536 channels per address.
- Instruments broadcast to all addresses.
- You programme each synth as to whether or not to listen.
- By default, instruments only listen to 16 channels (backward compatible
  with MIDI).
 
Protocol
 
- New types of message which do interesting things go as a new
  non-manufacturer specific sysex.  This stuff can just be ignored
  or filtered for backward compatibility.
 
- Some new features:
  independent note pitch bend
  allowing a long note to change volume in mid note
  extended pitch range and precision
  extended volume range and precision
 
Any more suggestions or flames?
 
Steven.Bramson@jet.uk
 
PS, nice to see JR3 back with us.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 22:34:23 -0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Boris BASKEVITCH <Boris.Baskevitch@INFORMATIK.FH-WOLFENBUETTEL.DE>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Fri,
              21 Oct 94 23:48:30."
              <199410241929.UAA11351@MAIL.FH-Wolfenbuettel.DE >
 
Steven says about ethernet for a new MIDI :
>Use ethernet.
 
The high baud rate sounds very interesting, accually, the whole thing
looks like the CAN.
You say :
>- You programme each synth as to whether or not to listen.
but on ethernet, i think that each tranceiver as an adress and sends
to adress(es), is it possible to broadcast ? What about synchronisation ?
 
>- By default, instruments only listen to 16 channels (backward compatible
>  with MIDI).
What kind of compatibility ?
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 24 Oct 1994 16:25:37 -0600
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         christine annette jackson <bambij@UNM.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Video - Shaping Your Sound
In-Reply-To:  <m0qz7So-000SoxC@eros.unm.edu>
 
On Sun, 23 Oct 1994, Victor Voo wrote:
 
> I live in Malaysia, a country literally on the other side of the
> world, which makes 800 numbers inaccessible.  I would appreciate
> it if someone could call First Light Video Publishing at:
>
>     1-800-777-1576
>
> and ask them for their FAX number and post it to me or this list.
 
Hey, Victor!
 
The FAX # is (310) 558-7891.
 
Good luck!
 
Bambi
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 18:39:16 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
Reply to message text:
 
 
>- Some new features:
>  independent note pitch bend
 
That would be nice
 
>  allowing a long note to change volume in mid note
 
Controller 7 already does this (doesnt it?)
 
Regards
 
DAVID  O"DONOGHOE
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM.AU
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 06:18:04 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      From the Management: Please Read
 
No sarcastic *sigh*s, please, folks. While there are a number of
people out there who are simply too lazy to remember how to
unsubscribe themselves properly, there are others who try and for some
reason cannot do it. There are usually reproducible reasons for this;
the one that comes immediately to mind is that a subscriber's local
mail router, hence their address, changes, and the list server doesn't
know about it. If an SIGNOFF message is sent from the new address, the
List Server will ignore it because it doesn't match the address on file.
This is one problem that Joe and I don't mind fixing, although it may
take us a day or two to process it by hand and we may have to talk to
you if the information you provide us is not complete or correct.
 
If you are having trouble unsubscribing, do NOT post a general help
call to the list; send private email to me AND Joe (atomic@netcom.com,
xrjdm@farside.gsfc.nasa.gov) with your current and old email
addresses. If the List Server's really wedged, we may have to go up
one rung on the AUVM hierarchy to get it fixed, so be patient. This
service is for those with real problems (i.e. tried at least twice to
unsubscribe properly, but couldn't; remember the command to send to
the list server, listserv@american.edu, is 'SIGNOFF <listname>' with
no username). Many times this problem can be avoided simply by
unsubscribing yourself temporarily before the switch is made and
resubscribing afterwards; it's rare that a switch is performed without
any prior warning to users.
 
One other note. We have been informed that the List Server and all of
the lists are being updated soon to a pure-Internet protocol; the
Bitnet address <list>@AUVM and the Internet address
<list>@auvm.american.edu will be superseded by <list>@american.edu.
You should change your aliases now. Anyone who is completely restricted
to BITNET-based access and is utterly incapable of Internet use should
contact us, so we can get a feel for how to continue your service.
 
Virtually yours,
mike
for the EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L management
 
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How does it sound? Well, if jackhammers could sing...." (d. a. c. crowell)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 14:37:56 CET
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jacek Latanowicz <JACK%PLPUAM11.BITNET@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>
Subject:      Re: From the Management: Please Read
In-Reply-To:  Message of Tue,
              25 Oct 1994 06:18:04 -0700 from <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
 
On Tue, 25 Oct 1994 06:18:04 -0700 atomic city said:
>No sarcastic *sigh*s, please, folks. While there are a number of
*sigh* :)
 
>
>Virtually yours,
Mike, My virtual GF writes me this kind of sentences :) hehehe
 
Jacek L.
 
 
>mike
>for the EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L management
>
>--
>mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"How does it sound? Well, if jackhammers could sing...." (d. a. c. crowell)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 06:55:26 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
In-Reply-To:  <199410250836.BAA25096@mail.netcom.com> from "DAVID O'DONOGHUE"
              at Oct 25, 94 06:39:16 pm
 
>>  allowing a long note to change volume in mid note
>
>Controller 7 already does this (doesnt it?)
 
Not necessarily. Knowing what I know about how some synths are
manufactured, it wouldn't surprise me if some synth architectures
(especially on older or cheaper digital synths) are set up so that the
synth itself samples volume at note-on and holds it there for as long
as the note is sounding. It saves processor load inside the synth, but
removes a level of dynamic control. If true (note that I'm making an
educated guess here, and cannot cite examples), this is a failing of
the synth, not of MIDI. As for individual-note pitch bends, this is
not a feature of MIDI 1.0, true, but how would you implement it? Most
folks who HAVE to have realtime per-note articulations within the
current standard simply use polyphonic pressure. The resolution is
poorer, but it's in there now, it works, and is supported by many
synths, at least as received data if not transmitted (you can paint it
in with a sequencer).
 
\newenvironment{Rant}[1]{\em #1\/}
 
\begin{Rant}{This is all IMO, of course, but....}
 
Personally, I believe that MIDI isn't the heart of the problem at all;
it's just a handy scapegoat. While there are some things that are
real, noticeable, and definitely MIDI's fault (lack of resolution in
Control Changes and/or sloppy handling of microtonality, for example),
many others are either the fault of the synths themselves, or even
mythical. I'm not too young to remember how MI industry people quoted
a three-millisecond-per-link cascading delay of MIDI through synths as
gospel for years, until in a controversial guest editorial in KEYBOARD
the head of MIDIMIX (nice company. I miss them; are they still in
business?) categorically called it a lie and supported his claim with
facts. And as a happy but occasionally exasperated owner of a Roland
U-50, I know for a fact that a lot of synth manufacturers aren't
putting near enough horsepower in their boxes. What good is a new
'standard' for synths that can't hack the old one? The only faint ray
of hope I see has nothing to do with ZIPI or CAN or any other cute
acronym; it's the (probably meaningless) claim by Roland that their
newest tone-box has a high-speed RISC processor in that can handle all
I/O and sound generation options at a reasonable throughput rate.
 
I regard these various new standards for control as worthwhile araes
for research, and pointers to the next generation of music control
(when it comes). But until we're all making music on 200MHz RISC audio
workstations over fiber-optic LANs, don't try to make me believe we
need them right now for the machines we have. If anything, the market
is being driven toward cheaper and simpler machines thanks to General
MIDI and computercarditis, not toward more complex datamunchers. Nice
cheap reliable easy-to-implement two-optoisolators-and-a-DIN-jack MIDI
is not getting less relevant to the music industry, but MORE relevant.
 
My studio is controlled by a reasonably inexpensive Mac with tightly
integrated software and a powerful MIDI interface with its own CPU
(anyone with more than three synths and/or two keyboard controllers
and/or a MIDI data processing device with merging and throughput like
an arpeggiator or an MRC who thinks a Studio 5LX is a waste of money
should have his head examined), and I know damn well where things are
bogging down and it ain't MIDI. Discussing new improvements to MIDI is
fine, but a clarion call to launch a new industry standard when the
one we have is underutilized and growing more popular and widespread
in terms of market share every day is rather quixotic and is bound to
lead to indigestion.
 
\end{rant}
 
Oo. I haven't written one of those in a WHILE! Kinda feels like having
your back scratched, doesn't it? ;->
 
mike
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How does it sound? Well, if jackhammers could sing...." (d. a. c. crowell)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 19:40:38 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
>Think about its successor FireWire,
>....
>Since it will come very soon
 
Ah yes, who was it who told me that a year ago...?
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 19:42:49 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Timbral notation and extreme reactions to music
 
>Now that I
>do most work on a sequencer, I find its graphic abilities overshadowing
>mine and changing how I work.
 
Danger Will Robinson. I found that as well, but also found that I was
getting hung up on things because I couldn't scribble quick notes; if the
layout was in the sequencer I quickly got tied down in "implementation"
details and stuff like that. Now I still do stuff on screen, but the paper
is here as well because that acts as a cache for implementation notes which
I can scribble on quickly without losing any creative process I'm working
on.
 
As it happens, I'm back using a sequencer (Vision) for the first time in
nearly a year. I'm not actually recording MIDI into it yet, just using it
as a sort-of cue sheet for now; MAX does most of the work (via beat sync)
and that in turn drives the R-8.
 
>Yep. When you come visiting next, remind me to show you the inner gatefold
>sleeve of "alpha centauri".
 
Oooh.
 
>Feh! Oops.
 
*Ding!*
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 16:00:51 EST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jason Price <jason_price@CC.CRANBROOK.EDU>
Subject:      Ethernet???
 
          Can someone help me out here, I am fairly new the EMusic-L
          mailing list, and I don'st understand what this Ethernet
          thing is.  Is this a network that you can sign on with your
          computer that broadcasts MIDI Signals????  I'm confused!
 
 
          jason_price@cc.cranbrook.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 07:36:46 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: Abolish MIDI now
 
Reply to message text:
 
>>>  allowing a long note to change volume in mid note
>>Controller 7 already does this (doesnt it?)
 
>Not necessarily. Knowing what I know about how some synths are
>manufactured, it wouldn't surprise me if some synth architectures
>(especially on older or cheaper digital synths) are set up so that the
>synth itself samples volume at note-on and holds it there for as long
>as the note is sounding
 
True..(try it on a Poly 800) most modern synths are OK in this regard, however.
 
> If true , this is a failing of the synth, not of MIDI.
 
Exactly
 
>As for individual-note pitch bends, this is not a feature of MIDI 1.0, true,
> but how would you implement it? Most
>folks who HAVE to have realtime per-note articulations within the
>current standard simply use polyphonic pressure.
> The resolution is poorer, but it's in there now, it works, and is supported
by many
>synths, at least as received data if not transmitted (you can paint it in with
a sequencer).
 
Again, it comes down to the limits imposed on us by the SYNTH.
As you noted, not EVERY synth transmits poly pressure (important to the sort of
person who wants pitchbend per note). Not every synth RECEIVES poly pressure.
And of those that DO receive it, not all of them will allow you to route PITCH
as the thing to be modulated.
Ho Hum..Problems, Problems...
 
> it's the (probably meaningless) claim by Roland that their
>newest tone-box has a high-speed RISC processor in that can handle all
>I/O and sound generation options at a reasonable throughput rate.
 
I HOPE it means that Continuous controllers will be handled ALOT faster.
I should be getting one at the shop this week...I guess we'll find out exactly
HOW MUCH this RISC chip means very soon....
 
Regards
 
DAVID O"DONOGHOE
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM.AU
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 16:54:55 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Kevan L. Moore" <kevan@MX6.MSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      polyphonic pitch-bending
 
> >As for individual-note pitch bends, this is not a feature of MIDI 1.0, true,
> > but how would you implement it? Most
> >folks who HAVE to have realtime per-note articulations within the
> >current standard simply use polyphonic pressure.
> > The resolution is poorer, but it's in there now, it works, and is supported
> by many
> >synths, at least as received data if not transmitted (you can paint it in
 with
> a sequencer).
 
how about a note on event with a 2-byte pitch instead of a note number?
using a scheme like that any pitch from 0 - 65535 hz could be specified.
unless you get WAY down into the bass range, 1 hz won't make a lot
of difference (beating < 1hz).   for finer resolution (still > range of human
 hearing)
dividing the 16-bit number by 4 gives you from 0 to 16384 hz with the maximum
 you'd be off from
the real pitch would be 1/4 hz. (if i'm not wrong, 14080hz is 5 octaves above
 the A above
middle C -- plenty high?)
 
        Note-on velocity notenumber             - old way
        Note-on velocity lo-byte hi-byte        - new way
 
would just cost one extra byte.  you wouldn't need pitch bending.
 
that would be great for monophonic instruments -- just play the pitch specified.
 
for polyphonic instruments, you'd have to say which note was bent to the current
 pitch.
 
as long as we're dreaming, why not specify volumes real-time (assuming a
 controller
could be made that allowed both pitch and volume to be specified).  say
you've got 8 total notes possible.  then every pitch message boils down to
 
        note-number volume lo-byte hi-byte
 
if a note's volume ever reaches zero, the next new note is assigned to it.
when each new note is assigned, envelopes are triggered (as in note-on) but
are modulateable by the real-time volume byte in the pitch message. obviously
pitch is specified real-time also.  all for only 4 bytes!  yeah! that's the
 ticket!
 
sorry, i've got to go.  Cindy Crawford is waiting in my Lamborghini to take
me to my Lear jet.  .   .     .      .      .       .        .
 
 
kevan
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 18:24:45 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      How to get the digest
 
>I'd rather subscribe to the digest (I can't keep up with all the postings).
>Thanks
 
I will do it for you. For anyone else who is interested; to receive the
day's messages as one big bundle sent out at midnight listserv-time, send a
 
 
SET EMUSIC-L DIGEST
 
to listserv@auvm.american.edu.
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"Don't be absurd. We're scaring the locals with music for fun, not profit."
(Lord Cthulhu, in Savage Henry #1)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 18:24:48 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Ethernet???
 
>          Can someone help me out here, I am fairly new the EMusic-L
>          mailing list, and I don'st understand what this Ethernet
>          thing is.  Is this a network that you can sign on with your
>          computer that broadcasts MIDI Signals????  I'm confused!
 
Not exactly. Ethernet per se is just a higher-speed networking protocol
which has drawbacks of its own. No one has implemented it in a commecial
product due to these drawbacks. As a vehicle for communicating between
computers, though, it is quite good. The discussion is indeed probably
wandering awfully far afield from the actual topics of this list.
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"Don't be absurd. We're scaring the locals with music for fun, not profit."
(Lord Cthulhu, in Savage Henry #1)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 25 Oct 1994 18:24:52 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      MIDI limitations do not equal synth limitations
 
The thing I see as a point which may be obvious to everyone by now, but
what the heck:
 
The MIDI implementation has it own problems. However, the principle
bottleneck in MIDI networks is not usually the data transfer, but the data
response. Consider:
 
1) Many synths do *not* simply ignore data which is meaningless to them. In an
   overload condition, in which many, many improperly formed messages are being
   sent, many synths crash or hang, rather than just ignoring the overruns.
   The fact that this can happen at all points to the bottleneck being in the
   processing and not the propagation.
2) Let's make an estimate, which is probably not accurate, but should be in the
   ballpark: With an ability to deliver about 31 thousand bits per second,
   a maxed-out MIDI network should be able to deliver around thirty events per
   second on 16 channels (and this is assuming 1 wire, 8-byte messages). How
   many synths can process 30 events per second in close to real-time?
 
The classic question when tuning the performance of any computer network
is, "Fix the worst response time first." In the case of MIDI, that's almost
always going to be how fast the synthesizer processes events, rather than
how fast events can flow.
 
The big weakness right now of MIDI *is* it's handling of continuous
controllers; though perhaps (much) faster processors might be able to
interpolate a curve in real-time to respond to controller motion and send
that as a sysex message...
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"Don't be absurd. We're scaring the locals with music for fun, not profit."
(Lord Cthulhu, in Savage Henry #1)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 10:43:54 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      MIDI volume
 
Hi MIDIphiles and MIDIphobes,
On Oct 25, David O'Donoghoe wrote:
>>  allowing a long note to change volume in mid note
 
Controller 7 already does this (doesnt it?)
 
Controller 7 will change the volume of all notes on that particular channel.
Only if one note is playing will a _single_ note be changed.
 
Regards, David Rodger <musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au>
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 09:28:35 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      It's OK - you don't have to unsub
 
>Hi I was ask to "unsubscribe" and towards the bottom of the message it
>mentioned something about "multiple recipents". As far as I know, I only ask
>to subscribe once. I enjoyed the mail I received, however, as I am new to the
>internet and its ediquitte, I am unsubscribing, as I have been instructed to
>do. But I really wish I didn't have to. Bye
 
No, really, you don't have to! If you want me to put you back on, just let
me know.
 
*** PEOPLE: PLEASE write to me (xrjdm@farside.gsfc.nasa.gov) or Metlay
(atomic@netcom.com) if you're having trouble. I don't want our new users to
be confused like this!
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"Don't be absurd. We're scaring the locals with music for fun, not profit."
(Lord Cthulhu, in Savage Henry #1)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 09:00:19 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Harry F.P. Haecker" <haeckerh@OSPREY.NWRC.GOV>
Subject:      Re: MIDI limitations do not equal synth limitations
 
Joe M. sez:
 
>The big weakness right now of MIDI *is* it's handling of continuous
>controllers; though perhaps (much) faster processors might be able to
>interpolate a curve in real-time to respond to controller motion and send
>that as a sysex message...
 
Will ZIPI have more increments, a la pitch bend with its 8192 steps, for
continuous controllers?  I've never liked the fact that I can hear the
individual points between 0-127 on, say, a filter opening (esp. noticeable
when the filter is scanning a wide range of frequencies).  That's one
reason that I like analogue synths (one of a total of only 4-5?).
 
HFPH
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 15:24:59 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Pall Haraldsson <pallha@RHI.HI.IS>
Subject:      Re: Simple mic question.
In-Reply-To:  <199410211833.SAA07416@eldborg.rhi.hi.is> from "Jacek Latanowicz"
              at Oct 21, 94 06:19:19 pm
 
> >        The formula is as follows:
> >        Freq response required = 0.5*f(s) + a little bit more.
> >where f(s) is your sample rate.
> >
>    Hi.
>
>   I think You mixed two things together. The 'response frequency' and
> 'samplig frequency'. The response frequency should be more or less but
> aquedate to ear perception 18-18000Hz. And the sampling frequency should
> be at least twice as great as the highest sampled frequency. So :
> 18000 * 2 = min. 36000 Hz. It was defined by Nequist and if YOu will drop
> below that the sound reproduction might be not clear.
>
> The exact factor is more than 2. I think it's 2.3 or 2.27 but I'm not sure
> right now.
>
> Jacek L.
>
> Ps. If You want further details I can explain it from the acoustical
> point of view - why should it be 2.3 times higher.
 
From what I've heard it's exactly 2 but that is just theoretically isn't it?
I've heard that sampling rate has to be a little higher because of imperfect
filters, i.e. if you would have a perfect filter the factor would be 2. Is
that right? And, if it is then doesn't the sampling rate have to get higher
with worse filters? And is it realy the factor that changes, i.e. is it
 
sample_rate = (2 + delta) * max_freq.
or
sample_rate = 2 * max_freq. + delta
 
and how do you calculate the delta?
 
And, another thing I've always wanted to ask but wasn't sure who to ask,
how does a (digital) mixer mix digital samples? Let's say you've got two
16 bit samples which you want to mix together (with equal volume) wouldn't
you get one 16 bit sample but lose 1 bit from each sample, i.e. the 16 bit
one is two 15 ones combined? => And if it where 4 16 bit ones you would
get 4 15 bit samples combined in one 16 bit? Etc, etc...
 
Pall Haraldsson (pallha@rhi.hi.is)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 11:48:16 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Eric Harnden (Ronin)" <harnden@DENALI.PHYSICS.AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject:      midi pitch resolution
 
someone suggested using 2 midi bytes for note control.
nope.
first, please don't forget that only seven bits of any data byte
are usable (the msb is a flag), so the resolution of two data bytes
is fourteen bits, for a maximum value of 16384. 16000 is not an
unreasonable top note (i think that the top midi note is g8, which
ought to be in that area), but if each midi note is to represent an
integer frequency, then not much is left for smooth pitch modulation.
a concert A, for instance, is 440Hz. A# is supposed to be 466.16Hz,
disregarding mean/just intonation arguments. if you use only integers,
then that's 466Hz, which is about 27 cents off. pretty bad tuning. the
only thing to do then is to limit the top and bottom range of expressed
values, reserving the extra data to improve resolution between notes. but
with only fourteen bits you really don't have enough to fill in all the
gaps. so go to three bytes?
naah. the hierarchical tuning structure of midi as it is begins to make a
little sense. one byte for note number (arbitrary pitch, mind you... most
new synths and a couple of old ones allow you to set your own actual
note number-to-pitch map), two bytes (when fully implemented) of pitch
bend between each. not bad, really.
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return-Path: <>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 1994 10:37:43 EDT
 
 
----- End forwarded message
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 12:02:16 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Eric Harnden (Ronin)" <harnden@DENALI.PHYSICS.AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject:      syntha brevis
 
well, actually, i am one of those people who tweaks forever, but i don't
really have a problem with my music moving from one setup to another.
i have a great deal of faith in serendipity. if it sounds different, i'll
probably like it. that is, after all, one of the main reasons i took up
electronic instruments to begin with. they sound different. and i'm
more and more appreciative of the ephemeral nature of a given sound.
i like to think of it as jazz. what is happening now is just what is
happening now. later, it'll be something else. of course, that's also
why i bought a dat recorder. sometimes i want to be able to make a record
of just what's happening now.  but that's still within the spirit of the
thing, i think. only a very few composers are so hardline about the
musical meaning of the moment that that they continue to refuse to be
recorded. and in classical music that ephermerality is long since gone.
we of course like to think it's there, and so collect different performances
of the brandenburgs, for instance. but be aware that what you get on cd
these days was probably never actually performed as you hear it. it's
a digital edit of many, many takes. the sound you hear is, in a sense,
not just ephemeral, but not even real. so... synths come, synths go.
that's ok. sometimes one comes along that i really want to work with for
a while. and my music then evolves. i've stopped using certain pieces
of equipment entirely. my prophet 5 isn't going to last another ten years.
i'll really miss the jx8p if it blows any time soon. but maybe by then i'll
be able to afford a waldorf... and so on.
 
<--- Entropy Always Wins, And I Like To Be On The Winning Side --->
  Eric Harnden (Ronin) harnden@physics.american.edu (202)885-2746
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 12:48:32 LCL
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Colin T. Smith" <Colin_T._Smith@BOPS.VOA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Nyquist
In-Reply-To:  TCPG1:BOPS:VOA's message <26-Oct-94 11:27:54 EDT>
 
>From what I've heard it's exactly 2 but that is just theoretically isn't it?
 
The sampling rate according to the Nyquist theory is approximately 2.2 times the
 highest sampled frequency.
 
Think about this, and this is not the real reason for the 2.2 times sampling
 rate. Take a 20kHz square wave and sample it at exactly  40,000 times a second.
  There is a possiibility that if the sampling clock falls exactly when the
 sampled wave crosses the zero point, the resulting sample will be a flat line
 (no audio)  Now this is extremely unlikely (1 in 40,000) but is theorically
 possible. Anything over  a 2 times sampling rate would allow for the squre wave
 to be accurately sampled.
 
>I've heard that sampling rate has to be a little higher because of imperfect
>filters, i.e. if you would have a perfect filter the factor would be 2. Is
>that right? And, if it is then doesn't the sampling rate have to get higher
>with worse filters? And is it realy the factor that changes, i.e. is it
 
Yes, not so much imperfect filters but the filters are analog and it is
 impossible to get an analog filter to attenuate instantly to -infinity.
 
Quoting from ºPrinciples of Digital Audioº by Ken C. Pohlman ºto satisfy the
 sampling theorem, manufacturers must design a low pass filter into any
 digitizing system, placing it first in the signal chain.  Because these analog
 filters cannot cut off the frequency precisely at the frquency the theorem
 demands, a guard band is employed.  The filter¹s cutoff frequency is begun at a
 lower frequency, allowing for the filter to sufficiently attenuate the signal.º
 
To reproduce a full 20kHz frequency and allow room for the filter to fully
 attenuate the signal, it is sampled by 2.2 times the frequency desired so the
 cutoff freq can begin at 20kHz and not before it.  if you multiply 20kHz by
 2.205 you come up with 44.1kHz, heh look ma, CD¹s!  I dont know if this
 standard is a result of the filters used at the time all of this digital stuff
 started and the filters have gotten better,  but because a standard was
 established we have to live with what is out there,  or if its the theorical
 limit of analog filters or......
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 13:17:56 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "william.b.fox" <wbf@ALOFT.ATT.COM>
Subject:      Re: Simple mic question.
 
From previous posts:
> >From what I've heard it's exactly 2 but that is just theoretically isn't it?
> I've heard that sampling rate has to be a little higher because of imperfect
> filters, i.e. if you would have a perfect filter the factor would be 2. Is
 
The (Harry) Nyquist Theorem states that you must sample at two times the
highest frequency of interest to capture the waveform.  For audio that
tops out at 20kHz, that means the sample frequency must be 40kHz to
faithfully capture a 20kHz sinewave.  Lower the sample frequency causes
aliasing.  This assumes a perfect LPF which has unity gain from 0Hz to
20kHz and a gain of zero above 20kHz.  This is why the CD sample
frequency is 44.1kHz.  Filters are not ideal.  By raising the sample
frequency (the orignal meaning given to oversampling years before the
CD!), we get a guard band between the audio and sampling noise, thus
relaxing the LPF anti-aliasing filter requirements.
 
Pall Haraldsson asks:
> And, another thing I've always wanted to ask but wasn't sure who to ask,
> how does a (digital) mixer mix digital samples? Let's say you've got two
> 16 bit samples which you want to mix together (with equal volume) wouldn't
> you get one 16 bit sample but lose 1 bit from each sample, i.e. the 16 bit
> one is two 15 ones combined? => And if it where 4 16 bit ones you would
> get 4 15 bit samples combined in one 16 bit? Etc, etc...
 
Hmm...  If two samples being added both have a value of 0xFF, then the sum
is 0x1FE.  Two 16 bit words require a 17 bit bit register to prevent
overflow or data corruption.  That is why a digital mixer and your
favorite FX box use 18 or 24 or larger registers for internal
operations.
 
Bill Fox        wbf@aloft.att.com
 
NEW GRAND UNIFIED THEORY DISCLAIMER: The Manufacturer may
technically be entitled to claim that this product is ten-dimensional.
However, the Consumer is reminded that this confers no legal rights
above and beyond those applicable to three-dimensional objects, since
the seven new dimensions are "rolled up" into such a small "area"
that they cannot be detected.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 22:27:48 +0100
Reply-To:     alan@cycle.demon.co.uk
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Alan Fitch <alan@CYCLE.DEMON.CO.UK>
Organization: Home
Subject:      Re: Nyquist
 
In article  <9410261704.aa28845@post.demon.co.uk> Colin_T._Smith@bops.voa.gov
 (you) wrote:
 
> >From what I've heard it's exactly 2 but that is just theoretically isn't it?
>
> The sampling rate according to the Nyquist theory is approximately 2.2 times
 the
>  highest sampled frequency.
>
 
I think everyone's getting confused here - Nyquist requires a factor of 2
 (exactly),
not 2.2.
 
> Think about this, and this is not the real reason for the 2.2 times sampling
>  rate. Take a 20kHz square wave and sample it at exactly  40,000 times a
 second.
 
This isn't quite right as a 20kHz square wave has components above the Nyquist
frequency - the Nyquist theorem simply says that a signal with frequency
components up to fs/2 can be reconstructed perfectly with a sample rate >=
fs.
 
A 20kHz square wave has components to infinity (or at least a long way...);
for instance the 1st partial of the squarewave would be only 9dB down
at 60kHz.
 
If you want to sample a signal at exactly fs/2 it _must_ be a pure sinewave.
 
> >I've heard that sampling rate has to be a little higher because of imperfect
> >filters, i.e. if you would have a perfect filter the factor would be 2. Is
> >that right? And, if it is then doesn't the sampling rate have to get higher
> >with worse filters? And is it realy the factor that changes, i.e. is it
>
> Yes, not so much imperfect filters but the filters are analog and it is
>  impossible to get an analog filter to attenuate instantly to -infinity.
 
Digital filters are also imperfect.  The reason is that it is not possible to
construct an infinitely fast roll-off filter.  A "brick wall" in the
frequency domain corresponds to an infinitely long impulse response in the
time domain.  For an analogue filter, the impulse response would eventually
fall below thermal noise, and for a digital filter the response would fall
below the precision of the calculations in the filter.
 
>
> Quoting from Principles of Digital Audio by Ken C. Pohlman to satisfy the
>  sampling theorem, manufacturers must design a low pass filter into any
>  digitizing system, placing it first in the signal chain.  Because these
 analog
>  filters cannot cut off the frequency precisely at the frquency the theorem
>  demands, a guard band is employed.  The filters cutoff frequency is begun at
 a
>  lower frequency, allowing for the filter to sufficiently attenuate the
 signal.
>
 
True.
 
> To reproduce a full 20kHz frequency and allow room for the filter to fully
>  attenuate the signal, it is sampled by 2.2 times the frequency desired so the
>  cutoff freq can begin at 20kHz and not before it.  if you multiply 20kHz by
>  2.205 you come up with 44.1kHz, heh look ma, CDs!
 
Complete coincidence, I'm afraid!  The reason for the 44.1kHz rate dates from
 early
digital recorders based on TV technology.  44.1kHz was a multiple of a TV
rate in NTSC I believe.
 
The main design constraint in making filters very rapid cutoff is that it
 introduces
severe phase distortion at the point of cutoff.  Hence a compromise has to be
reached between achieving sufficient attenuation at fs/2, without throwing away
half the signal (due to a slow cut-off implying a low corner frequency), or
introducing loads of ringing and phase distortion.  Of course most modern
DACs and ADCs are oversampled for precisely these reasons, i.e. by oversampling
to 88kHz, the filter design problem is drastically simplified.
 
I hope this helps
                  regards,
                            Alan
 
 
--
Alan Fitch
Tel.:           +44 (0)1703 472342 (voice)
E-mail:         alan@cycle.demon.co.uk
 
Thank god it's not Christmas.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 26 Oct 1994 21:22:10 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Wesley Felteau <wfelteau@ST6000.SCT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Mac Av digital audio and disc space
In-Reply-To:  <9410211533.AA08633@st6000.sct.edu> from "Stefan Scheffler" at
              Oct 21, 94 03:50:55 pm
 
The only way that I know how to get more than 2 tracks of dig snd on an AV
Mac is to use a rack mount product by Digidesign called Session 8.
This DSP allows one to record up to 8 tracks digital and mix it down
to two.
The bottleneck for recording more than 2 tracks lies in the Mac architecture
(and PC arch) therefor one must use an external DSP.
 
Wes  N/S Productions Atlanta GA
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 13:50:59 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: Nyquist
 
On 26 October, Alan Fitch wrote:
 
> Complete coincidence, I'm afraid!  The reason for the 44.1kHz rate dates
> From early digital recorders based on TV technology.  44.1kHz was a multiple
of a TV rate in NTSC, I believe.
 
This may be true, but is no longer so.  The nominal NTSC rate in the early
(black and white) days of U.S. TV was 30 frames per second.  If we wanted
sample accurate synch with video then 44.1kHz would be fine.  That's 1470
samples per frame.  But when colour came in, there was some obscure (meaning,
I don't know what it was!) technical reason that exactly 30 frames per
second couldn't be used.  So they switched to 29.97 frames per second; i.e.,
0.1% slower.
 
Problem!  All the old shows were at 30fps and if shown at 29.97fps would
run 3 seconds and some frames long for every hour (can't remember the exact
figure).  So some had to be cut out.  A standard way of resolving the old
frame rate ws found and results in "drop-frame" rates.  While no actual
video frames are dropped (or deleted in any way), some of their numbers
are, so that the frame count at the end of an hour will resemble the
real time of the hour.  For example, if a show begins at 00:00:00:00 and
runs at 29.97fps, it is still shot shot at 30frames per "second".  To keep
the count more or less in synch with actual running time, every so often
a frame number (not an actual frame) is dropped.  The result is that the
show will end on frame count 01:00:00:00 and the actual running time
will be exactly 1 hour.  This is referred to as 29.97 drop-frame.
 
Complicated, isn't it?  There's a terrific article explaining the ins
and outs of the various time code frame rates, in their "drop" and "non-
drop" (or "full-frame") versions and the ways of cross-resolving time
code between different media, in a special edition of Mix magazine (U.S.)
sometime during 1993 (May, I think).  It's by Larry Blake and is very
good.  I think he's written a book about time code since, which might
be available on the MIX Bookshelf.
 
So, how does this relate to sampling?  Well, with dropframe time code,
you no longer have a whole number of samples per frame and the audio
will actually be going out of synch with the video until a drop in the
frame count occurs (I don't recall how often).  Sometimes, lower or
higher sampling rates (44.056, 44.144, 47.952 kHz) are used so that the
various media (video, audio, etc.) can be resolved during post-production.
 
It's really much easier here in Australia, and in Europe, where the
standard time code is 25 frames per second for film and video.  So we
always have a whole number of audio samples per frame and always stay
in synch.  Of course, with so much material being sold across the world,
we have to deal with U.S. programs with dop and non-drop 29.97 and 30fps
and people in the U.S. have to deal with those programs using lower
frame rates too.  Unfortunately, there's no simple way around this, at
least until we all switch exclusively to some agreed standard for
disk-based non-linear audio and video systems!  (Not likely!)
 
Anyway, if you're only worried about audio, all this doesn't matter.
In fact, 48kHz is a more common audio-only sampling rate (as used by
reel-to-reel and cassette-based digital machines), although some
machines will let you select.  There's sometimes talk of really high
sampling rates (e.g. 96kHz) so that the shape of high-frequency
waveforms is preserved better.  Can we hear the difference?  I don't
know.  I'm just happy if the damn thing sounds good!
 
Happy sampling and video editing,
David.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 01:42:31 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         john rossi <jrossi@BGNET.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Mac Av digital audio and disc space
In-Reply-To:  <199410270135.VAA16763@falcon.bgsu.edu>
 
On Wed, 26 Oct 1994, Wesley Felteau wrote:
 
> The bottleneck for recording more than 2 tracks lies in the Mac architecture
> (and PC arch) therefor one must use an external DSP.
>
 
I don't know enough about Macs to comment, however, I fail to see how the
PC arcitecture precludes recording more than two tracks.  Of course you
would need A/Ds and the corresponding sample and holds but I see nothing
which limits the number of channels you can record except, possibly, bus
speed.  With Local Bus speeds of up to 50MHz, and PCI speeds at 33 MHz,
you would be able to record a hell of a lot of channels if you, say, ran
under dos and weren't generating spurious interrupts.  I mean, ADATs and
DA-88s get 8 comfortable channels of 48K sampled data into a littl more
than 4MHz bandwidth.  Of course a computer has a lot of overhead
considering disk drive access, but even if it took as many as 20 machine
cycles to sample one channel, you still have more than twice the
bandwidth of an ADAT,l even in the worst case.  Even if you assume that
the disk drives would be the rate limiting step, 8 channels at 48KHz
would only require sustained data rates of about 3.8MHz, hardly taxing
for a decent SCSI drive.
 
John 3
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 03:19:11 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Phillip Djwa <djwa@IEAR.ARTS.RPI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Mac Av digital audio and disc space
In-Reply-To:  <9410270143.AA04208@iear.arts.rpi.edu>; from "Wesley Felteau" at
              Oct 26, 94 9:22 pm
 
Geez,
I'm not sure whether I missed the first posting re:digital audio on AV
macs, but I have a 660AV and I have 6-trks digital audio with DECK II
from OSC in San francisco(or is it San potrero??) My friend with an 840AV
has 8trks with Deck II. It is a sometimes flaky program, but nothing
as flaky as protools, so I'm happy.
 
phillip djwa
djwa@iear.arts.rpi.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 03:54:28 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Arne Claassen ISE <claassen@EBS330.EB.UAH.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Mac Av digital audio and disc space
In-Reply-To:  <9410270543.AA10491@ebs330> from "john rossi" at Oct 27,
              94 01:42:31 am
 
>
> On Wed, 26 Oct 1994, Wesley Felteau wrote:
>
> > The bottleneck for recording more than 2 tracks lies in the Mac architecture
> > (and PC arch) therefor one must use an external DSP.
> >
>
> I don't know enough about Macs to comment, however, I fail to see how the
> PC arcitecture precludes recording more than two tracks.  Of course you
> would need A/Ds and the corresponding sample and holds but I see nothing
> which limits the number of channels you can record except, possibly, bus
 
I have to agree. The fact that there are various programs that let you do
multi-track work on AV machines shows that it can deal with multiple tracks
in real time. The real problem is that there is only that one stereo pair
for input. Same problem with an audiomedia II. You can record only as many
tracks as there are inputs. A problem that the Session 8 interface does
take care of, but not because of more DSP power, but more A/D converters.
 
--
Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"[I]f a license was required to drive your synth, there might be less of a
need for these newbie-type questions - then again, we'd have to deal with
a Department of Transportation (Workstation?) - aaahhhhh!" - Jeff Schultz
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 22:22:00 +1300
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         John Thomsen <THOMSENJ@SCHOOLS.MINEDU.GOVT.NZ>
Subject:      Assistance required with Mellotron MUART/Spirit
 
To the Internet, from the Antipodes, greetings.
 
In other words, G'day from Down Under!
 
I have a problem.
 
I purchased from Radio Shack in winter '91 a Mellotron MUART MIDI
controller card/box and Mellotron Spirit sequencer software.  I had
had no problems with it, until 1630 Fri 21 Oct 94 NZDT.  All of a
sudden, the sequencer software would no longer work.  (A big problem,
because I was in the middle of a recording session.)
 
On Tue 25 Oct 94 I attempted to call the Mellotron Technical Support
Group at (813) 572 6356.  I let it ring probably 30 times, then gave
up.  (The New York time was about 1530 Mon 24 Oct 94.)  Then I tried
the number for Mellotron Digital Corporation.  I got the following
recorded message:
 
   'Beep-beep-beep.  The number you have dialed, 944 6789, in area
   code 516, has been disconnected.  No further information is
   available.  The number you have dialed, ...'
 
So, my questions for the Internet are manifold:
 
   1.  Does anybody know what happened to Mellotron?  NY Directory
       Assistance doesn't have any listing for any Mellotron.
   2.  If they're still around but have changed their name/location/
       etc., does anybody know how I can get in touch with them?
   3.  If they don't exist anymore, does anybody have a copy of the
       Mellotron Spirit software that they could please zip or arj and
       uuencode and mail to me?  I've traced the problem to the
       software, but both my original and backup disks have been
       toasted, and I'm really up the proverbial estuary without means
       of locomotion.  I *desperately* need my software up and
       running.
 
You're probably thinking why I just don't get a SoundBlaster with MIDI
capability, the right hardware to hook it up to my synth, and another
music program.  The reasons:
 
   1.  Spirit uses a nonstandard file format.  The MIDI information is
       still the same, but the format's weird.
   2.  I don't know how a proper MIDI file works, so I can't write a
       conversion program.
   3.  I can't afford at the moment to get another set of hardware.
   4.  I can't afford more software.
   5.  Besides, I don't think that I could find anything that would
       work on my ancient 8-MHz 8086 with 640K RAM and two floppies
       (360K and 720K).
 
Further: I apologise to all those out there who subscribe to more than
one mailing list who have seen this twice or more.  I'm so desperate
that I've posted this anywhere I think it might do some good.  Does
anybody know of a listserv for MIDI musicians I could try posting to?
 
The canonical list of lists that this went to is as follows:
   WIN3-L
   ACTMUS-L
   ALLMUSIC
   AT-PROF
   AUDIO-L
   BRASS-L
   BLUES-L
   CLASSM-L
   EARLYM-L
   EMUSIC-L
   ETHMUS-L
   GEACMUS
 
*PLEASE* don't flame me, as I don't know the address for a MIDI music
list, and I figure that anybody out there could have this software.
Just sending this to one listserv wouldn't reach as wide an audience
as sending to multiple lists. Usenetters can be thankful for the fact
that I don't have access to Usenet (but this will change in a month or
so... watch out! ;-)
 
Also: Please reply personally to me.
 
Hoping sincerely that someone out there can help me,
 
John Thomsen
Musician and chief programmer at Weresoft NZ
email address: thomsenj@schools.minedu.govt.nz
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 20:53:51 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Daniel Murphy <dmurphy@PIONEER.AS.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Hi! What's This List Like?
 
Hi all!
 
I just subscribed and was wondering who was on the list and what you're all
like. I suppose you get a heap of these type of messages so I'll tell you a
bit about myself.
 
I'm from Australia. I play the pipe organ and piano. I LURVE movies. I live
on the beach. I like springboard diving, skiing (both types) and swimming.
My favourite artists - at the momenet - are Madonna, Prince and
Soundgarden. That's about it I suppose.
 
Now it's your turn!
 
 
 
Daniel.
 
 
  ==================================================
  |             Daniel Murphy                      |
  |              3 Illawong Street                 |
  |               Point Cartwright                 |
  |                Buddina Beach                   |
  |                 Queensland 4575                |
  |                  AUSTRALIA                     |
  |                                                |
  |           dmurphy@pioneer.as.edu.au            |
  ==================================================
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 12:04:04 GMT0BST
Reply-To:     M.Rootes@shu.ac.uk
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Martin Rootes <M.J.Rootes@SHU.AC.UK>
Organization: Sheffield Hallam University
Subject:      Re: Nyquist
 
> From:           David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
> ......
> It's really much easier here in Australia, and in Europe, where the
> standard time code is 25 frames per second for film and video.
I'm not sure this is correct, I have always been told that the frame rate for
film is (universally) 24 frames per second. The frame rate for televison was
based on the mains AC frequency hence Europe & Australia 50Hz leads to 25 fps,
America 60Hz leads to 30 fps (originally). I've been told that the film frame
rate of 24 was decided as it can be divided by multiples of 2 and 3, however
this could just be an urban myth.
 
  Martin.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Rootes - Senior Systems Programmer/Analyst, Sheffield Hallam University
Email :         M.Rootes@shu.ac.uk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  As this is not a real signature, the opinions above may not even be mine!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 12:03:58 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Sonneck Society for American Music <monty@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
 Subject: American Music Network
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.941027115826.16270B-100000@access4.digex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
 
                                        October 27 1994
 
SONNECK SOCIETY FOR AMERICAN MUSIC ANNOUNCES THE AMERICAN MUSIC NETWORK
 
     The Sonneck Society for American Music announces the establishing of
the American Music Network on the Internet.  The Network can be accessed
by the following commands:
          gopher gopher.tmn.com.
          select #5 Arts Wire
          select #6 American Music Network.
     The Network has been established as a service to the public and
interested organizations to promote the performance and study of
American Music.
     There are currently 2 databases available on-line.  These are:
          Coming Events in American Music
          American Music Week Events
     Several other databases are being developed for access by the
public.  These are:
          Speaker's/Performer's Bureau for American Music
          Important Dates in American Music History
     Members of the Sonneck Society may submit data to be added to any
of the databases.  Members of the public may search and read any of the files
using gopher or other Internet tools.  A dial-up line is planned to be
installed for public access to the American Music Network in the future.  It
is also planned to establish a mailing list (listserv) for American Music
in the future.
     Any organizations sponsoring events as part of American Music Week,
normally the first week in November (November 6-13 1994), may submit their
events directly to the Network. Information on format for submittals
and membership is available on-line at gopher gopher.tmn.com,
as described above.
     It is hoped that this Network will become a clearinghouse for all
areas of American Music.  Performers will be able to offer their talents
to the public, worldwide.  There is no charge for the service, other than
membership in the Sonneck Society ($50/year).  Promoters and program
managers will be able to find performers or events of interest on
American Music.  The public and media will be able to find events on
American Music easily and conveniently.
     Questions on the American Music Network may be sent to:
          Bill Everett, Chair, Public Relations Committee
          Sonneck Society for American Music
          email: <zzever@acc.wvacc.edu>
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 12:42:49 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Sonneck Society for American Music <monty@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject: Correction of Announcement on American Music Network
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.941027122947.17719B-100000@access4.digex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
 
Please correct email address given in previous announcement.
 
     Questions on the American Music Network may be sent to:
          Bill Everett, Chair, Public Relations Committee
          Sonneck Society for American Music
          email: <zzever@acc.wuacc.edu>
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 27 Oct 1994 18:18:27 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stefan Scheffler <stefan@MMS-GMBH.DE>
Subject:      Re: Mac Av digital audio and disc space
 
>under dos and weren't generating spurious interrupts.  I mean, ADATs and
>DA-88s get 8 comfortable channels of 48K sampled data into a littl more
>than 4MHz bandwidth.  Of course a computer has a lot of overhead
>considering disk drive access, but even if it took as many as 20 machine
>cycles to sample one channel, you still have more than twice the
>bandwidth of an ADAT,l even in the worst case.  Even if you assume that
>the disk drives would be the rate limiting step, 8 channels at 48KHz
>would only require sustained data rates of about 3.8MHz, hardly taxing
>for a decent SCSI drive.
All is true what you wrote, but you did not look at the problems at large.
You made the common mistake to forget that the general purpose computer has
to do other tasks as well.
 
The CPU, The Heat
Todays CPU's are fast enough to do tons of sound channels with EQ and other
fancy stuff. Including the production of heat.
 
The bottle neck number one the Operating system
With the current Operating systems the processor, bus and what soever waits
until completing of an I/O request. When the disk can transfer at a rate of
4 Mb/s and the computer reads this amount of data from it, it will take the
computer exactly one second to complete this transfer.
That means your bandwidth is suddently shrinked to 4 MHz and nothing else
had happened in between, no mixing of data, no further transfer to the A/D
converter (though this is done today with DMA sometimes, therefore in
parallel to the CPU) no screen updates, and no user interaction handling.
 
The disks limits
Also there are very few (at least no one I know of) hard disks which can
transfer the data for multiple audio tracks with the above mentioned
transfer rate. Today 1.5 to 2.5 MB/s is more common for 4 track systems (4
* mono or 4 * stereo) and 1.0 to 1.5 MB/s for 8 tracks  (8 * mono). This is
sufficient enough for a standalone hard disk recording system. But if your
general purpose computer with the big two OS's has to do it, it cannot do
anything else.
(Note: The transfer numbers can be increased by using a lot more buffer
memory inside the computer. The disk transfer rate goes down through the
head movement and the disk spinning, by providing more buffer memory bigger
adjacent chunks of data can be read from disk, therefore reducing the head
movement)
 
Why an ADAT/DA-88 can handle it
Systems like the ADAT or the DA-88 get their data as a continous stream
from the tape, therfore the data transfer is constant over the time and
needs less buffering. Also the data processing will not be done by the main
CPU. In fact the "main" CPU in such a system is as powerful as the PC
keyboard controller. Through the dedicated sub systems in such a device it
can perform its task with less overall power and is also more stable.
 
At the mainframe heaters in your todays general purpose computer most heat,
i.e. power, gets lost through inefficient operating system design and
implementation.
 
The Mac OS is currently the most capable OS. It can do more tasks which has
to do with hard disk recording than the other popular system. Also the Mac
AV computer system has an architecture which support this kind of
"multitasking".
(I cannot tell anything about OS/2 it might can get things even better. My
NeXT does, though its not a popular system or OS).
With a proper future OS, even next years OS, this problem can be solved,
but as of today it is not.
 
Be happy to get 2 or four tracks today, tomorrow you will get tons. But
there are different definitions of tomorrow.
 
Ciao,
   Stefan
 
<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 28 Oct 1994 12:53:41 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: Hi! What's This List Like?
 
Hello Dan,
welcome to the list from another Australian.  You'll also see David
O'Donoghoe (spelling?), Paul Copeland and Clive McFarlane, among others,
who would seem to be Ozsters, too.  I mention these chaps because they're
very vocal (or should that be literal?).
 
Happy emusic,
David Rodger    <musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au>
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 28 Oct 1994 12:57:53 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      SMPTE and film frame rates
 
On 27 October, Martin wrote:
 
>I'm not sure if this is correct, but I've been told that the frame rate for
>film is (universally) 24 frames per second.
 
I don't know what proportionof filmmakers are using 24 or 25 fps, but, either
way it makes for easier transfers than 29.97 fps or drop frame.
 
As for 24 being chosen for its duple and triple divisibility, I don't know.
Film historians, it's your call...
 
Regards, David.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 28 Oct 1994 10:13:26 +0200
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "A. Fiorletta" <ccd505@CCD.UTOVRM.IT>
Subject:      Mr. Fourier contest
 
Hello guys!
 
What is the fastest Fast Fourier Transform algorithm that you know?
Please send a mail with your plain C code and you'll enter in the competition.
PLEASE NOTE that you will win nothing but the good feel of helping someone
(me!) in doing its spectrum job faster. You will also win the proud of being
the "Fastest Fourier Transformer" of the list!
 
Many Thanks for your help.
 
Alessandro
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 28 Oct 1994 13:02:29 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stefan Scheffler <stefan@MMS-GMBH.DE>
Subject:      Re: Mr. Fourier contest
 
>What is the fastest Fast Fourier Transform algorithm that you know?
>Please send a mail with your plain C code and you'll enter in the competition.
>PLEASE NOTE that you will win nothing but the good feel of helping someone
>(me!) in doing its spectrum job faster. You will also win the proud of being
>the "Fastest Fourier Transformer" of the list!
What computer do you need it for. Algorithms which have to speedy has to
take advantage of the CPU architecture. 68K, RISC or DSP based
implementations will not run as fast on a x86 based system and visa versa.
I cannot provide you with ready to go implementations (I get always object
files), but when you know your CPU architecture you will be able to tune
the FFT yourself.
You can also look at the IRCAM or the CCRMA ftp sites, they might have FFT
implementations for various system.
 
You will get "Fastest Fourier Transformer" of the list when you beat a
Motorola 56K DSP with 32 MHz. It needs 3 milliseconds for a 1024 point FFT.
(Maybe its an unfair comparison, the 56K was designed with the FFT in
mind). Anyway, good luck and keep hacking.
 
Ciao,
    Stefan
 
<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 28 Oct 1994 13:53:59 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Patte Wood <patte@CCRMA.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Russian Electroacoustic Music
 
LECTURE AND CONCERT
OF
RUSSIAN ELECTROACOUSTIC MUSIC
 
at the
Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics (CCRMA)
The Knoll, 660 Lomita Drive, Stanford University Campus
 
Andre Smirnov, Director of the Electroacoustic Studio in Moscow, will present a
 lecture regarding his
work on Wednesday, November 2 at 1:15 pm in the Knoll Ballroom.  He will also
 present a short concert
of electroacoustic music in Russia on Thursday, November 3  at 4:00pm in the
 Knoll Ballroom.
 
for information and directions call 415 723-4971.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 28 Oct 1994 14:14:57 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Patte Wood <patte@CCRMA.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject:      Russian Electroacoustic Music
 
If you got this twice, I apologize.
 
 
 
LECTURE AND CONCERT
OF
RUSSIAN ELECTROACOUSTIC MUSIC
 
at the
Center for Computer Research in Music and Acoustics (CCRMA)
The Knoll, 660 Lomita Drive, Stanford University Campus
 
Andre Smirnov, Director of the Electroacoustic Studio in Moscow, will present a
 lecture regarding his
work on Wednesday, November 2 at 1:15 pm in the Knoll Ballroom.  He will also
 present a short concert
of electroacoustic music in Russia on Thursday, November 3  at 4:00pm in the
 Knoll Ballroom.
 
for information and directions call 415 723-4971.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 03:10:07 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Michael Pelz-Sherman <mspboss!zappa!mps@UUNET.UU.NET>
Subject:      Musical Interaction on the Infobahn Revisited
 
Dear members of the Internet Electronic Music Community:
 
Imagine tapping via your computer into a continuous, live
musical improvisation by musicians located throughout the
world, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week...
 
Imagine being able to participate in this global improvisation,
or simply act as a discrete observer, filtering selected
elements as desired...
 
Since the HMSL list seems to have been given a new breath of
life recently, I thought I would re-circulate this idea.
 
Over the past several months, I've been trying to rally some
interest in creating a system for making sonic art in shared
virtual environments via the Internet. A few people have
responded favorably to these ideas, and some good suggestions
have been put forward, but so far nothing substantial has
really come of this correspondance. Unfortunately, I lack the
time and means to provide a technical solution to carry out
these ideas, nor would I wish to be the sole contributor to
the design and implementation of such a system. Perhaps those
readers better equipped than myself to develop software for
the benefit of the virtual music community will take up the
concept and run with it. I consider myself to be best able to
contribute to this hypothetical project in a conceptual/design
capacity at this time, although I am not at all adverse to
getting my hands dirty and writing some code!
 
So here is the latest core-dump of an idea whose time (I think)
may be close, if not already here:
 
I would like to spark some interest in the formation of an
non-commercial, de-centralized, group software development
effort centered around the creation of an extensible computer
system/language for remote, as-real-time-as-possible musical
interaction. I feel that such an effort would be best carried
out under the auspices of many diverse individuals at many
different institutions, so as to avoid exessive uniformity of
approach, and to insure the free availability of the system.
 
I see the system as having the following major components:
 
        1. a central server which handles communication
 
        between agents and processes;
 
        2. client software which handles communication with the
 
        server;
 
        3. a standard protocol for passing messages to processes
 
        running locally (on the client machines)
 
        4. an optional standard for timbral specification, and/or
 
        5. an optional method of sample playback
 
The software I have in mind would essentially be a combination
of an Internet MUD client (ala Ken Keyes' "TinyFugue", but
adapted for a PC on a modem connection), with something like
HMSL or Formula. The basic idea is this:  participants connect
to a central MUD-like server, which handles basic ascii
text-based message passing; the client program parses certain
strings coming over the modem as input to locally-running
music-generating software, which in turn sends commands to
the sound generating hardware. People could upload/download
music-generating processes, samples and synthesizer patches
via a common FTP site.
 
A very simple example of an interaction might be thus:
 
[Jim types "#play piano"]       ==> the '#' character tells the
client
[Jim sees:]                     ==> to interpret the following text
as
You sit down at the piano.      ==> input to the music engine.
[You see:]
Jim sits down at the piano.
[Jim types "play piano:C arp up"]
[Jim sees:]
You play an upward C major arpeggio.
[You see:]
Jim plays an upward C major arpeggio.
[All hear: an upward C major arpeggio played on a piano voice with a
 
default tempo of 16th notes at 120 BPM]
[You type: "#Jim:repeat"]
[You see:]
You repeat Jim's upward C major arpeggio.
[Jim sees:]
Michael repeats your upward C major arpeggio.
[Others see:]
Michael repeats Jim's upward C major arpeggio.
[All hear: the same arpeggio again.]
 
...
The above example implies a "natural language" user interface,
but it would also be interesting to consider how graphics
could be used. A simpler approach would define a stricter,
less "English-like" protocol. My assumption is that sending
MIDI events in real time over the 'Net would not be as
interesting as controlling higher-level processes, but certainly
some means of entering musical phrases directly using a MIDI
keyboard should be a part of the system. At any rate, using
an extensible system such as HMSL would ensure that an
ever-expanding universe of music-generating process would be
available.
 
One technical reality that would need to be addressed is the
need for a site (with a system administrator) for the server.
 
*** Are there any readers with available facilities who would be
*** willing to set up and maintain such a site?
 
*** (CCRMA? CRCA? IRCAM?)
 
Above all, the system should be:
 
 - Open-ended
 - Inexpensive/Free
 - User-Extensible
 
This concept would benefit greatly from all kinds of input.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts.  Please direct your
response to the entire list, not just to me; I'll leave it up
to the moderators of the lists whether to take the discussion
off-line. Please forward this message to anyone not on these lists
who might be interested.
 
Michael Pelz-Sherman
UCSD Music Dept. PhD Candidate
Software Engineer, Integrity Solutions
(Currently living in St. Paul, Minnesota, USA)
------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 01:35:06 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nate Waddoups <natew@HALCYON.COM>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  <199410071757.AA24249@halcyon.com>
 
On Fri, 7 Oct 1994, Jacek Latanowicz wrote:
 
> Btw, a typical amplifier can transmit freqs from 1Hz to 200000Hz. The problem
> is in speakers which usually have limited range from 18-18000Hz or adding
 
Actually, you'd be hard pressed to find speakers that can produce
frequencies as low as 18 Hz at audible levels.  I had a pair in my car,
but they only fit because I didn't want the back seat.  :)
 
> some piezos to a ultra range lets say 40000Hz. But woofers propagating
> waves in the air can't generate SOUND below 20 or 18 Hz. They will shake,
> move but no sound can be heard...it's just a VIBRATION, and air can catch
> up with it so NO SOUND IS GENERATED. Just visual movements.
 
I don't buy it.  Figure this: my Beetle was maybe eight or ten feet from
dashboard to rear window.  I don't know the frequency corresponding to
that wavelength - 100? 150?  At any rate, below that frequency, speakers
don't 'propogate sound waves,' they just pressurize and depressurize the
air in the car's cabin.
 
I don't know how you want to define sound, but 30 Hz tones were
definately audible (felt nice, too).   Below 20 Hz or so, the problem is
that you stop hearing the noise as a tone, and start percieving it as an
rapid series of discrete noises.   Make a noise with a synth that is just
a square wave.  Make it at lower and lower frequencies...  In the
neighborhood of 20 cycles/second, you'll stop hearing a buzz and start
hearing rapid clicking.
 
I'm guessing that low-frequency stuff like we've been talking about would
best be done with sine waves, to get rid of audible higher-frequency
noises, which would probably be deafening if the subsonics (infrasonics?)
were to be effective.  At those frequencies, you need to move a LOT of
air to be noticable.
 
In conclusion, I'm NOT one of those people driving around listening to
rap music audible for blocks.  I have more respect for those around me
than that.  And much better taste in music. :)
 
+-------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
| natew@halcyon.com | You write Windows code?  Mac code?  OS/2 PM code?
+-------------------+ Want a great job in the pacific northwest?
                      Send me email, we'll talk...
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 19:12:43 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Damien James Miller <943127@EDNA.CC.SWIN.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  <9410080842.26692@munnari.oz.au>
 
On Sat, 8 Oct 1994, Nate Waddoups wrote:
 
> On Fri, 7 Oct 1994, Jacek Latanowicz wrote:
>
> > Btw, a typical amplifier can transmit freqs from 1Hz to 200000Hz. The
 problem
> > is in speakers which usually have limited range from 18-18000Hz or adding
>
> Actually, you'd be hard pressed to find speakers that can produce
> frequencies as low as 18 Hz at audible levels.  I had a pair in my car,
> but they only fit because I didn't want the back seat.  :)
 
I like this :)
 
> > some piezos to a ultra range lets say 40000Hz. But woofers propagating
> > waves in the air can't generate SOUND below 20 or 18 Hz. They will shake,
> > move but no sound can be heard...it's just a VIBRATION, and air can catch
> > up with it so NO SOUND IS GENERATED. Just visual movements.
>
> I don't buy it.  Figure this: my Beetle was maybe eight or ten feet from
> dashboard to rear window.  I don't know the frequency corresponding to
> that wavelength - 100? 150?  At any rate, below that frequency, speakers
> don't 'propogate sound waves,' they just pressurize and depressurize the
> air in the car's cabin.
 
How is pressurizing and depressurising air different to propogating sound
waves? Won't the observer get the same effect regardless?
 
>
> I don't know how you want to define sound, but 30 Hz tones were
> definately audible (felt nice, too).   Below 20 Hz or so, the problem is
> that you stop hearing the noise as a tone, and start percieving it as an
> rapid series of discrete noises.   Make a noise with a synth that is just
> a square wave.  Make it at lower and lower frequencies...  In the
> neighborhood of 20 cycles/second, you'll stop hearing a buzz and start
> hearing rapid clicking.
 
Square waves aren't a good choice for this, because they have lots of high
frequency information, try a sine wave.
 
>
> I'm guessing that low-frequency stuff like we've been talking about would
> best be done with sine waves, to get rid of audible higher-frequency
> noises, which would probably be deafening if the subsonics (infrasonics?)
> were to be effective.  At those frequencies, you need to move a LOT of
> air to be noticable.
 
Have you ever felt/heard an explosion? sounds/feels very strange :)
 
>
> In conclusion, I'm NOT one of those people driving around listening to
> rap music audible for blocks.  I have more respect for those around me
> than that.  And much better taste in music. :)
 
Thank God, he used his speakers for good, instead of evil :)
 
 
Damien
 
**************************************************************************
|   Damien Miller  aka  toado@edna.cc.swin.edu.au  aka  Silicon Dreams   |
|----------------------===========================-----------------------|
|                          CAUTION: WEIRD LOAD                           |
**************************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 11:03:07 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
>I was of course interested in
>pursuing this effect, but had no further luck with it other than to
>spawn general hilarity on rec.music.synth with my reports on "Project
>SyntheSex," the text of which is happily lost forever.
 
You reckon?
 
>metlay  (the "m.m." stands for  | Project SyntheSex: Where the listener always
>                "my moniker's") |                    comes first.
>metlay@pittvms.BITNET           | Or, to quote K*te, "They told us what they
>metlay@vms.cis.pitt.EDU         | wanted was a sound that could...er...."  |->
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 13:15:21 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jeff Wheeler <jwheeler@BIGCAT.MISSOURI.EDU>
Subject:      CSOUND
 
Hi all,
Any idea where I can find CSOUND for PC or more info about where it can
be acquired? Thanks in advance!! (I have been off this list for a couple
of months, so if this topic has drawn out past it's due, I apologize.)
Ciao, Jeff
 
       ______________________________________________________________
      | Jeffrey K. Wheeler                       |                   |
      | jwheeler@bigcat missouri.edu             |        JKW        |
      |                                          |    VirtualMusic   |
      | 3600 E. Hidden Lane                      |         &         |
      | Hartsburg, Missouri  65039-9774   U.S.A. |       Sound       |
       --------------------------------------------------------------
          "I only know that through music you can reach to God"
                                                    Ali Akbar Khan
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 11:17:54 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Arne Claassen ISE <CLAASSEN@EBS330.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  <9410080918.AA18494@ebs330> from "Damien James Miller" at Oct 8,
              94 07:12:43 pm
 
> > > some piezos to a ultra range lets say 40000Hz. But woofers propagating
> > > waves in the air can't generate SOUND below 20 or 18 Hz. They will shake,
> > > move but no sound can be heard...it's just a VIBRATION, and air can catch
> > > up with it so NO SOUND IS GENERATED. Just visual movements.
> >
> > I don't buy it.  Figure this: my Beetle was maybe eight or ten feet from
> > dashboard to rear window.  I don't know the frequency corresponding to
> > that wavelength - 100? 150?  At any rate, below that frequency, speakers
> > don't 'propogate sound waves,' they just pressurize and depressurize the
> > air in the car's cabin.
>
> How is pressurizing and depressurising air different to propogating sound
> waves? Won't the observer get the same effect regardless?
 
The way i understand it, sound is created, but is also below the spectrum of
the human ear. Below 18Hz or thereabouts, one feels the sound pressure with
the body more than hears it with the ears. Also at frequencies between 80hz
and 20hz, you can still hear it but have a hard time to localize the sound, as
the wavelength exceeds the distnace between the two ears. (Or soemthing along
those lines.)
 
 
 
--
Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             <MST3k>
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 11:22:18 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Arne Claassen ISE <CLAASSEN@EBS330.BITNET>
Subject:      Help: Looking for Multidisk extension...
 
Sorry to waste bandwidth with non-emusic stuff, but i'm in a jam.
 
My Harddisk crashed and upon recovering it, i found an extension that i vitally
need to do recover some of my music stuff corrupted.
 
Does anyone have any leads where i could find, purchase, hold up a store and
get the Multidisk extensions for the Macintosh?
 
Thanks, and for the sake of pissing off too many people, please reply by
email if you have any leads to finding Multidisk.
 
--
Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             <MST3k>
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 15:46:48 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Don Brutzman <mspboss!uunet!cs.nps.navy.mil!brutzman@UUNET.UU.NET>
Subject:      Re: Musical Interaction on the Infobahn Revisited
In-Reply-To:  <9410080810.AA12469@zappa> from "Michael Pelz-Sherman" at Oct 8,
              94 03:10:07 am
 
>Imagine tapping via your computer into a continuous, live
> musical improvisation by musicians located throughout the
> world, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week...
 
A worldwide audio channel already exists which might be adapted as an
output stream for this effort:  the Multicast Backbone (MBONE).
Info follows:
 
"MBone Provides Audio and Video Across the Internet"
Michael R. Macedonia and Donald P. Brutzman
_IEEE COMPUTER_, pp. 30-36, April 1994.
 
PostScript, text, and hypertext versions of this article are available as
ftp://taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil/pub/mbmg/mbone.ps
ftp://taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil/pub/mbmg/mbone.txt
ftp://taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil/pub/mbmg/mbone.html
 
IP address of taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil is 131.120.1.13
 
We wrote this article for two reasons.  The first was to clarify
terminology and technical questions about how the MBone works.
The second was to help people get their sites connected and use
the tools more effectively.  Hopefully the article is of value
in these respects to you.
 
regards, Don
 
--
Don Brutzman                                           work (408) 656-2149
Code OR/Br   Naval Postgraduate School  [Glasgow 204]  fax  (408) 656-2595
Monterey California 93943-5000  USA                    home (408) 372-0190
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 18:10:07 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nate Waddoups <natew@HALCYON.COM>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  <199410082132.AA23642@halcyon.com>
 
On Sat, 8 Oct 1994, Arne Claassen ISE wrote:
 
> > > > move but no sound can be heard...it's just a VIBRATION, and air can
 catch
> > > > up with it so NO SOUND IS GENERATED. Just visual movements.
> > >
> > > I don't buy it.  Figure this: my Beetle was maybe eight or ten feet from
> > > dashboard to rear window.  I don't know the frequency corresponding to
> > > that wavelength - 100? 150?  At any rate, below that frequency, speakers
> > > don't 'propogate sound waves,' they just pressurize and depressurize the
> > > air in the car's cabin.
> >
> > How is pressurizing and depressurising air different to propogating sound
> > waves? Won't the observer get the same effect regardless?
 
Yep.  That was exactly my point.
 
> The way i understand it, sound is created, but is also below the spectrum of
> the human ear. Below 18Hz or thereabouts, one feels the sound pressure with
 
As an aside, a friend told be about a National Geographic (or some such
show) peice involving subwoofers and elephants.  Had something to do with
them using the lower octaves like we use our range and bats use theirs.
 
> the body more than hears it with the ears. Also at frequencies between 80hz
> and 20hz, you can still hear it but have a hard time to localize the sound, as
> the wavelength exceeds the distnace between the two ears. (Or soemthing along
> those lines.)
 
Yes... One of your chief means of identifying direction is the arrival
time and phase differences between your two ears.  It's not a conscious
calculation, of course - kind of like using stereo vision for depth
perception.
 
To bring this closer to topic, I get the impression that timing delays
like this are exploited in '3-d' sound processors.  A friend was just
saying that another large part of it is the differing frequency response
your ears get from different directions, due to the effects of your outer
ear, and their positions on your head.
 
Interesting stuff.
+-------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
| natew@halcyon.com | You write Windows code?  Mac code?  OS/2 PM code?
+-------------------+ Want a great job in the pacific northwest?
                      Send me email, we'll talk...
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 00:02:39 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jeff Wheeler <jwheeler@BIGCAT.MISSOURI.EDU>
Subject:      CSOUND (fwd)
 
Not sure if I'm getting through. I've sent too messages with no response.
Am I not getting through, or am I jist being ignored. Someone please
advise if this is received. Sorry for the wasted airtime.
J
 
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 1994 13:15:21 -0500 (CDT)
From: Jeff Wheeler <jwheeler@bigcat>
To: EMUSIC-L <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Subject: CSOUND
 
Hi all,
Any idea where I can find CSOUND for PC or more info about where it can
be acquired? Thanks in advance!! (I have been off this list for a couple
of months, so if this topic has drawn out past it's due, I apologize.)
Ciao, Jeff
 
       ______________________________________________________________
      | Jeffrey K. Wheeler                       |                   |
      | jwheeler@bigcat missouri.edu             |        JKW        |
      |                                          |    VirtualMusic   |
      | 3600 E. Hidden Lane                      |         &         |
      | Hartsburg, Missouri  65039-9774   U.S.A. |       Sound       |
       --------------------------------------------------------------
          "I only know that through music you can reach to God"
                                                    Ali Akbar Khan
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 10:15:49 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: To pitch or not to pitch
 
>Yes, even though I'm not the proud owner of either a music degree or a
>brand-spankin'-new Morpheus, I'm also interested in (as Eno puts it)
>the "vertical aspect of sound". I'm considering a MicroWave, however...
>I take it that the two synths are comparable?
 
You can indeed compare them, coming to the conclusion that they are different.
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 11:44:09 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Bill Matthews <wmatthew@ABACUS.BATES.EDU>
Subject:      Re: CSOUND (fwd)
In-Reply-To:  <no.id> from "Jeff Wheeler" at Oct 9, 94 00:02:39 am
 
csound for pc's:
 
PC/286-DOS      ftp.maths.bath.ac.uk:pub/dream/csound_286_fpt.zip
PC/286-DOS      ftp.maths.bath.ac.uk:pub/dream/csound_286.zip
PC/386-DOS      ftp.maths.bath.ac.uk:pub/dream/csound_386_fpt.zip
PC/386-DOS      ftp.maths.bath.ac.uk:pub/dream/csound_386.zip
PC/486DX-DOS    ftp.maths.bath.ac.uk:pub/dream/csound_486.zip
PC/Windows      ftp.maths.bath.ac.uk:pub/dream/wcsound.zip
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 10:11:47 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         HARRY HAECKER <BTHAEC@LSUVM.SNCC.LSU.EDU>
Subject:      To pith or not to pith
In-Reply-To:  Message of Sun, 9 Oct 1994 10:15:49 +0100 from <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
 
Nick Rothwell pithily penned in haste:
 
>you can indeed compare (the Morpheus and the MicroWave), coming to the
>conclusion that they are different.
 
Ahem...
 
I was using the word "comparable" in the second sense of the Webster's
Dictionary, that is "equivalent, similar".  Your information that they
are different synths is rather open ended: a Yamaha TG77 and an SY77 are
different, in that (amongst other details) the former is a rack-mount and
the latter is a keyboard.  However, their synthesis engine is the same.
Hence, they are comparable.
 
I guess one could even make the point that two individual synthesizers
of the same model are "different"...one may have more dust on it!  But
they are comparable.  Not "compare-able" but comparable, with the accent
on the first syllable.
 
Not being familiar with the Morpheus, and only slightly familiar with the
MicroWave I was actually groping for details on how they compared with
each other.  To say that they are different is an obvious point.  To
indicate the method of synthesis for the Morpheus, how it changes the
waveform from one type to another, without using wavetable synthesis, is
much more imformative.  Also, the character of the sound produced,
ease of editing, product support, price, etc., are parameters which can be
expounded upon, as long as you're replying.  I guess since it is free
information that I'm after, I get what I pay for!  :)
 
BTW, did you upgrade yours to the latest OS?  Is there any computer based
editing available yet for the MicroWave?
 
HFPH
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 17:28:44 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Polaris <taka-03@INFINET.COM>
Subject:      Re: CSOUND (fwd)
In-Reply-To:  <m0qtqPX-000DLqC@mail.infinet.com>
 
> Not sure if I'm getting through. I've sent too messages with no response.
> Am I not getting through, or am I jist being ignored. Someone please
> advise if this is received. Sorry for the wasted airtime.
> Any idea where I can find CSOUND for PC or more info about where it can
> be acquired? Thanks in advance!! (I have been off this list for a couple
> of months, so if this topic has drawn out past it's due, I apologize.)
 
You're getting through fine.  Either there aren't al ot of people here or
they are NOT very helpful to newbies and the like.  Try ftping to
ftp.bath.ac.uk and go to /pub/jpff.  IF this doesn't work, let me know.
CSOUND, to my knowledge, is only to be posted certain places at the
authors' request.
 
Later,
Polaris  Home of the PIYON-PIYON Collective--Look for me on IGS too!
  __________________________________________________________________________
(*__________________________________________________________________________*)
 ___________
|\     ___  \
\ \    \  \  \                          >>Wall of Sound Productions<<
 \ \    \__\  \                            .MAKING.DREAMS.REALITY.
  \ \     _____\
   \ \    \____|                         Internet:  Taka-03@InfiNet.com
    \ \    \                      Sound Bytes BBS:  614.761.1602
     \ \    \ OLARIS                     MIDILink:  via Sound Management BBS
      \ \____\                  Ambient*Progressive House*Traxx*Trance*Ethnic
       \|____|            Bubblegum Crisis*Bubblegum Crash*Dominion*Appleseed
  __________________________________________________________________________
(*____G_E_N_K_I__D_E_!___I_K_U__Z_O_!___M_A_T_A__N_E_!___R_A_V_E__O_N_!_____*)
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 19:22:03 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         FNELSON@OCVAXA.CC.OBERLIN.EDU
Subject:      Computer Music Job at Oberlin
 
*******PLEASE CIRCULATE*******
NOTICE OF FACULTY VACANCY IN ELECTRONIC AND=20
COMPUTER MUSIC
 
The Conservatory of Music at Oberlin College invites=20
applications for a continuing, full-time, tenure-track, position in=
=20
the Technology in Music and Related Arts (TIMARA)=20
Department beginning in the 1995-96 academic year. =20
 
The Conservatory of Music is America=D5s oldest school dedicated=20
to the training of professional musicians.  Founded in 1865, it=20
was the first college-affiliated conservatory in the United States. =
=20
Its students are enrolled in undergraduate programs leading to=20
the Bachelor of Music in performance, composition, music=20
education, music history, historical performance, electronic and=20
computer music, and jazz studies; graduate programs leading to=20
a master of music in conducting, historical performance, or=20
opera theater; master of music education; or master of music in=20
teaching.  Performance and artist diplomas are also offered.  The=
=20
Conservatory and College have earned national reputations of=20
excellence based upon the quality of the student body (drawn=20
=66rom every state in the union and abroad), fine faculty, and=20
excellent facilities.
 
The TIMARA Department offers a four-year curriculum leading=20
to a Bachelor of Music degree in electronic and computer music. =20
There are two full time teaching faculty, a full time music=20
engineer, and a part time teacher of studio recording.  There are=
=20
25-30 majors.
 
The individual appointed will have general responsibility for and=
=20
will perform the following specific duties:
 
1. Teach courses in analog and digital sound synthesis,=20
computer music software, multi-track recording=20
technique, and other areas related to multimedia.
 
2. Teach composition focusing on technological media.
 
3. Participate in committees, meetings and activities of the=20
TIMARA Department and the  Conservatory of Music.
 
4. Advise students on artistic, academic, and career matters.
 
Qualifications include:
 
1. A doctorate in composition or computer music with a=20
body of compositions and research that represents a=20
substantial engagement in the creation of new works.
 
2. Demonstrated experience and achievement in digital and=20
analog signal processing, sound synthesis, and computer=20
programming.
 
3. Experience with interactive computer music systems and=20
digital instruments in composition and performance.
 
4. Experience with computer graphics, animation, and=20
video techniques.
 
5. Teaching experience in electronic and computer music.
 
6. A commitment to electronic and computer music as the=20
principal focus of a professional career in musical=20
composition.
 
Interested persons should submit credentials to Karen L. Wolff,=20
Dean, Oberlin College Conservatory of Music, Oberlin, Ohio=20
44074.  All credentials should be received by November 15,=20
1994 to ensure consideration.  Those received after that date will=
=20
be considered until the position is filled.  The appointment will=
=20
be made at the rank of Assistant or Associate Professor.  Salary=20
will be commensurate with experience and qualifications.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 20:35:42 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joshua Fried <jf@ESCAPE.COM>
Subject:      convergence
 
Help!
 
Some time back there was a posting of a call for submissions to
Convergence, the due date being October 15. I saved it on a disk that I
swore wouldn't crash (I know, I know).
 
Anybody got the info?
 
thanks
jf@escape.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 15:29:11 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
Hi folks...
 
> most science types want to be musicians
 
Not necessarily.
 
> but threy (sic) can't hear a perfect fifth never mind anything more
complicated than I VI ii V  I.
 
I know a few musicians who can't hear a perfect fifth!
 
Lerv, DR
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 23:08:12 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nate Waddoups <natew@HALCYON.COM>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <199410100542.AA21967@halcyon.com>
 
On Mon, 10 Oct 1994, David Rodger wrote:
 
> I know a few musicians who can't hear a perfect fifth!
 
Heck, I'm one of them!
 
+-------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
| natew@halcyon.com | You write Windows code?  Mac code?  OS/2 PM code?
+-------------------+ Want a great job in the pacific northwest?
                      Send me email, we'll talk...
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 17:14:35 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: To pith or not to pith
 
Reply to message text:
 
>Nick Rothwell pithily penned in haste:
 
>>you can indeed compare (the Morpheus and the MicroWave), coming to the
>>conclusion that they are different.
 
Oh well, *I* found it amusing......
 
>: a Yamaha TG77 and an SY77 are different, in that)
>the former is a rack-mount and the latter is a keyboard.
 
Does the TG-77 suffer 'controller envy'?
 
>However, their synthesis engine is the same.
>Hence, they are comparable.
 
Yes, but if we use the other meaning wouldnt it be a boring comparison?
 
>Not being familiar with the Morpheus, and only slightly familiar with the
>MicroWave I was actually groping for details on how they #compared# with
>each other.
 
Havent you just negated your own argument?
 
>To say that they are different is an obvious point.  To
>indicate the method of synthesis for the Morpheus, how it changes the
>waveform from one type to another, without using wavetable synthesis, is
>much more imformative.
 
OK then, the Morpheus uses a fourteen pole filter system for timbral
manipulation.
It doesnt actually "Morph" as in "Terminator 2" ( more a case of EMUs marketing
department capitalizing on a buzzword).
 
The Microwave owes its heritage to PPG.
It will sweep through different wavetables to give effects similar ( in some
ways) to Ensoniqs 'transwave' system in the VFX, or far more complex sounds.
Thomas Dolby used the PPG synth extensively on the album "The golden years of
wireless"
 
> Also, the character of the sound produced, ease of editing, product support,
price, etc., are parameters which can be expounded upon
 
The Morpheus a sound which is identifiably its own (as does the microwave, I
guess).
It remains to be seen how quickly this sound will date. (Remember how many ads
suddenly  had wave sequences splattered all over them when the Wavestation was
released?)
The general consensus has been that the Morpheus' filter section should have
been more editable.
 
Regards
 
David O'Donoghoe
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM.AU
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 8 Oct 1994 20:59:58 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         keeshan chris <zzkeesha@ACC.WUACC.EDU>
Subject:      sequencing software for the IBM-PC
 
Hello.
I am looking for a good freeware(preferably)/shareware sequencing software
package for the IBM-PC compatible.  Can anyone help me?
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 10:53:28 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Burton Beerman <BBEERMA@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      seq software for pc
 
<Hello.
<I am looking for a good freeware(preferably)/shareware sequencing software
<package for the IBM-PC compatible.  Can anyone help me?
 
I remember seeing an add for seq software in elec musician by the band-in-a-box
people for a sequencer that included notation, faders for only $29.00.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 11:48:01 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "E. Candy Held" <echel@CONNCOLL.EDU>
 
Please Post.
 
Note:  Deadline for submissions for the 5th Biennial Symposium has been=20
extended to *November 15th*.
 
CALL FOR PAPERS, MUSIC COMPOSITIONS,=20
PRESENTATIONS, ARTWORKS, CHOREOGRAPHY, DANCE=20
STUDIES AND INTERACTIVE INSTALLATIONS
 
CONVERGENCE:
 THE FIFTH BIENNIAL SYMPOSIUM ON ARTS AND=20
TECHNOLOGY,=20
MARCH 2-5, 1995
 
The Connecticut College Center for Arts and Technology, in=20
collaboration with the departments of  Academic=20
Computing, Art, Art History, Chemistry, Dance,  English,=20
Library, Mathematics/Computer Science, Music, Physics,=20
Physical Education, Psychology, and Theater, is pleased to=20
announce CONVERGENCE: The Fifth Biennial Symposium on=20
Arts and Technology, March 2-5, 1995.  The Symposium=20
will consist of paper sessions, panel discussions, art=20
exhibitions, concerts of music, mixed media works, video,=20
dance and experimental theater.  Selected papers and=20
presentations will be published by the Center as both=20
printed and interactive multi-media CD-Rom Proceedings.
 
Papers and Presentations:
A detailed two-page abstract including audio-visual=20
requirements should be sent to the address below no later=20
than November 15, 1994.  Authors of accepted papers will=20
be notified by December 1, 1994.  Finished papers must=20
be submitted in camera-ready form by January 15, 1995. =20
In order for material to be considered for inclusion in the=20
CD-Rom version of the Proceedings, it must also be=20
submitted on disk in one of the following formats: Word=20
or Wordperfect. The Center encourages research papers=20
and presentations in all areas of the arts and technology,=20
but is particularly interested receiving papers concerned=20
with Interactivity, Virtual Reality, Cognition, Information=20
Technologies, Applications in Video and Film, Music=20
(composition, performance, theory, interactivity, etc.),=20
Experimental Theater, Compositional Process, Speculative=20
Use of Technology in Education, Computer Simulations of=20
Physical Phenomena, Scientific Visualization and Social=20
and Ethical Issues in Arts and Technology.
 
Music Compositions:
Works for instruments and tape, or tape alone, or=20
interactive  compositions are being solicited at this time.=20
Available instruments are: flute (doubling on piccolo),=20
oboe, clarinet (doubling on bass clarinet), bassoon,=20
trumpet, horn, trombone, percussion (two players), piano,=20
and strings (2,1,1,1). =20
 
Works should not exceed 15 minutes in length and should=20
be submitted with accompanying score, where=20
appropriate.  Tapes for selection purposes should be on=20
cassette or 1/2 inch VHS.  Tapes for performance should=20
be 15 i.p.s. stereo or quadraphonic, or DAT.  Video works=20
should be 3/4 inch Umatic or 1/2 inch VHS.  A self-
addressed, preposted envelope should be included for the=20
return of materials within the U.S.A.  Foreign materials=20
will be returned at our expense.
 
Artworks:
Works of computer-generated or computer-aided art, or=20
computer -controlled interactive art are encouraged. =20
Animations, Video or other works of computer art on tape=20
will be shown in concert settings and in less formal=20
settings throughout the Symposium.  Slides or video (VHS)=20
and complete descriptions of works should be submitted=20
by the general deadline of November 15, 1994.  Black and=20
White photographs for publicity and for possible=20
reproduction in a printed insert to the Proceedings  must=20
be sent by January 15, 1995.   Reproductions of  accepted=20
works for the CD-Rom Proceedings  must be sent on disk=20
(Pict, Tiff, PCX) by Jan 15, 1995.  Funds for the shipping of=20
artworks are extremely limited.  Call or write the address=20
below for more information on the shipping of artwork.
 
Choreography and Dance Studies:
Computer-generated or computer-aided choreography is=20
being solicited for live performance or for videotaped=20
presentation.  Specially produced dance videos are of=20
particular interest, as opposed to concert tapes or other=20
archival uses of video for dance.  Also of interest are=20
proposals for demonstrations of software for dance=20
notation, choreographic analysis, or for interactive studies=20
in dance.  Workshop proposals are also welcome.
 
Videotapes or complete descriptions of performance=20
works (not longer than 20 minutes), demonstration or=20
workshop proposals should be submitted by the general=20
deadline of November 15, 1994.  Tapes for selection=20
purposes should be VHS.
 
Panels:
Proposals for panels are welcome.  The proposals should=20
include prospective panelists, and should be directed to=20
topics which fit the general description of the Symposium. =20
Of particular interest for 1995 are panels on the general=20
topic of =D2Convergence=D3 which might include explorations of=20
cross-disciplinary approaches to arts and technology=20
issues.
 
GENERAL INFORMATION ON SUBMISSIONS
Please include a self-addressed preposted envelope=20
envelope for the return of materials within the US. =20
Foreign materials will be returned at our expense.  The=20
Center encourages email submissions for text materials. =20
Material should be sent to:
 
Center for Arts and Technology
Box 5365
Connecticut College
270 Mohegan Avenue
New London, CT 06320-4196
tel: [203] 439-2001
email:  cat@conncoll.edu
 
..................................
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 10:12:48 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         HARRY HAECKER <BTHAEC@LSUVM.SNCC.LSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: To pith or not to pith
In-Reply-To:  Message of Mon,
              10 Oct 1994 17:14:35 +1000 from <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
 
>Oh, well, *I* found it amusing...
 
Actually, so did I.  Trying to stay angry at Mr. Rothwell's posts is a
futile, fruitless pasttime- much like shaking your fist at a chattering
squirrel high in a tree.  :-))
 
>Does the TG77 suffer controller envy?
 
Yes, as a matter of fact.  I've had to send mine to counseling numerous
times.  Group therapy doesn't seem to help her self esteem any; as a
matter of fact, she became suicidal last year when I bought my K2000RS.
Talk about controller envy!! She begged me to send 220 volts through her;
alas, to no avail: I told her she still had many frequencies to modulate
in ways that the K2k can't even _touch_.  That realization helped her
self image greatly.
 
>Yes, but if we use the other meaning, wouldn't it be a boring comparison?
 
Yes, my point exactly.  I don't like boring comparisons, no matter which
definition you use!
>>I was actually groping for details on how they compared.
  >Aren't you negating your own argument?
 
Uh oh, I hope not!  I *hate* it when that happens!  :)
Actually, the operative word (which I should have underlined) is _details_.
 
 14 pole filter, PPG, editability comments, etc.|
 
Yea! you got the ticket!  Now _that's_ info I can sink my pearly whites
into! So, back to the original posting concerning the vertical aspect
of sound...
 
The MicroWave sounds like it might give wider possibilities for exploration
of timbre-- not neccessarily better, just more parameters of sound
manipulation.  Does the Morpheus exclusively use ROM based samples, or
can one import sounds via SMDI or SDX?  I understand that the MicroWave
has a closed number of wave cycles.  That's OK by me, since the permutations
sound ENORMOUS.
 
>the Morpheus' filter section should've been more editable
 
Hmm, big oversight, if that's its sole method of timbre manipulation!
 
later,
 
HFPH
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 09:30:05 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Brewer <dbrewer@CALVIN.LINFIELD.EDU>
Subject:      Wind MIDI controllers...
 
Does anyone out there know anything about wind MIDI controllers?
 
To phrase that question more specifically, I am an alto and tenor
saxophonist who interested in purchasing a wind MIDI controller.  The
only one I have seen any adverts for is a Yamaha... I believe the volume
was controlled by wind pressure, the pitch could be altered by pressure
on the reed, and the fingering was fairly standard saxophone.
 
If anyone has had any experiences with one of these devices, a reply
would be much appreciated.  I like MIDI, but I'm a LOUSY keyboard
player.  :-)
 
David Brewer
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 12:50:18 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Ab Wilson <nwilson@MORGAN.COM>
Subject:      Re: To pith or not to pith
In-Reply-To:  <94Oct10.030635edt.41392@gateway.morgan.com>
 
DAVID O'DONOGHUE writes:
 > Does the TG-77 suffer 'controller envy'?
 
No, but the SY suffers from output envy ;-)
 
        Ab.
 
--
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 13:35:53 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Keith C. Perry N3QQZ" <perrykc@DUNX1.OCS.DREXEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
In-Reply-To:  <199410101629.MAA19175@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu> from "David Brewer"
              at Oct 10, 94 09:30:05 am
 
According to David Brewer:
>
> Does anyone out there know anything about wind MIDI controllers?
>
> To phrase that question more specifically, I am an alto and tenor
> saxophonist who interested in purchasing a wind MIDI controller.  The
> only one I have seen any adverts for is a Yamaha... I believe the volume
> was controlled by wind pressure, the pitch could be altered by pressure
> on the reed, and the fingering was fairly standard saxophone...
 
Well David, like you I play both, I am about to purchase a WX-11 which the
windcontroller by Yamaha.  Actually it is their second one some time ago,
they also had a WX-7 model.  Back then I wasn't really into wind
controllers but not that I have a studio, I'm trying to get back into
playing my "main" instrument (if there is such a thing :) ).  I've played
the WX-7 and at the time I thought it was ok. I have heard however that
the WX-11 has a better design so the device will feel more natural (this I
heard from someone at a music so as always, take it with a grain of salt)
I'm only going to purchase the instrument the midi converter since I
already have enough midi sound boxes (I don't need the WT-11 that can be
purchased with it).  In any event I've heard go things about the
controller and even though I haven't played the new model, I was somewhat
impressed with the older one- if Yamaha has made any major improvement,
the WX-11 is probably really *nice* (there a profound statement :) ).  I
have the brochure on the WX and WT-11 I cound probably fax or mail you a
copy if your really interested...
 
Though, I suspect you are probably perfectly capable to going to your
local music store to pick one up...
 
===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===
Keith C. Perry                                /\ "To be or not to be...
Floor Supervisor / Senior Consultant          \/     THAT AIN'T A QUESTION"
Drexel University Office of Computing Services--|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
...
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 17:41:46 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Magnus Barber <J.M.Barber@BNR.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
In-Reply-To:  <"24332 Mon Oct 10 16:31:08 1994"@bnr.co.uk>
 
         Regarding MIDI controllers and wind-instruments:
 
              I saw a concert last year in which the sax-player had a MIDI
         microphone in front of the "end bit" (I lack knowledge of the
         technical terms in wind instruments!!) - from there he'd hooked it
         up to a sound module - from which wierd and wonderful sounds were
         emanating! (I guess it *could* have been an FX-box...(?))I really
         sorry, but I didn't really think to ask him his set-up (I'm
         primarily a guitar player). If you find anything I'm sure you'll
         have a great time playing around!
 
              sorry that I haven't got anything more useful
 
                        magnusb
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 10:51:31 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Tracy Collins <tcollins@CISCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon,
              10 Oct 1994 17:41:46 -0000.
              <199410101744.KAA29743@hubbub.cisco.com>
 
I play tenor sax and own a WX-11.  I have heard that the
WX-7 is "better" than the WX-11, but I was unable to find
anyone willing to sell me one.  I recall the argument being
that one can fine tune more parameters on the the WX-7.
 
You *cannot* play the WX-11 without the WT-11 (tone generator
and MIDI interface).  The WX-11 is designed to only connect
to the WT-11.  The WX-11 does *not* have a MIDI interface.
 
The WT-11 does have MIDI IN, OUT and THRU connections, so you
can use whatever MIDI synth you like.
 
Playing the WT-11 is not at all like playing a sax.  It's a different
instrument, and I would approach it as such.
--------
tracy collins          cisco systems
hardware engineer      1525 o'brien drive
tcollins@cisco.com     menlo park, ca 94025
voice: 415.688.8126    fax: 415.688.8204
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 17:13:04 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Phil Skiba <SPS5251%SIENA.BITNET@VM.ITS.RPI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
 
can you use the yamaha -7 directly, i.e. does a midi cord come out
that I can plug into my synth, or does that also require a box as
does the wt-11.  also, does anybody know a price on a midi guitar (not
the add-on pickups i.e. the roland systems).  I am primarily a guitar
player, and am usually forced to sequence my synth stuff because I
am a piss-poor keyboardist.
 
I saw someone playing a midi guitar this weekend, I think it might have
been a yamaha as well, but I am not sure.
 
phil
sps5251@siena.bitnet
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 14:37:38 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Tracy Collins <tcollins@CISCO.COM>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
In-Reply-To:  Your message of Mon,
              10 Oct 1994 17:13:04 -0500.
              <199410102110.OAA10992@hubbub.cisco.com>
 
> can you use the yamaha -7 directly, i.e. does a midi cord come out
> that I can plug into my synth, or does that also require a box as
> does the wt-11.
 
I am not sure, but I don't believe that the WX-7 has a
MIDI interface.  I don't own one, so maybe someone who does
can answer this.
 
--------
tracy collins          cisco systems
hardware engineer      1525 o'brien drive
tcollins@cisco.com     menlo park, ca 94025
voice: 415.688.8126    fax: 415.688.8204
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 18:31:30 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Burton Beerman <BBEERMA@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      wind controllers
 
<Does anyone out there know anything about wind MIDI controllers?
 
Your question is so broad I am not sure how to respond.  I am a wind player (a
lot of clarinet in an intermedia duo with a dancer.  I use a pitch-to-MIDI
converter and put this into the computer MIDI in.  Then I can write code in MAX
or c programming language using Carnegie-Mellon's C. Music Kit as an interface
for MIDI.  Programs can then follow the clarinet by harmonizing certain notes,
start sequences, take part of the cl part and join in with counter point, etc.
 Output of synth drives voice modules, effects units like the digitech tsr 24,
etc.  I also use the Yamaha WX7 (original one).  It has bells and whistles that
the WX-11 didn't keep (later model).  I prefer both of these units over the
Akai Wind Controller.  It's keys do not move and I find it much more clumsy to
learn.  All wind controllers are problematical, in that an acoustic wind player
keeps moving his fingers a bit ahead of his tongue and this is fatal with the
wind controller, resulting in little blips and bleeps when using the octave
keys, especially (which is another problem).  Advantage of the pitch to MIDI
converter is that it is your acoustic instrument, but there is a slight delay
(roughly 10 ms at low pitches?).  This can be quite noticable.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 18:35:55 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Burton Beerman <BBEERMA@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      <can you use the yamaha -7 directly,
              i.e. does a midi cord come out
 
<that I can plug into my synth,
 
wx7 has a MIDI out that goes directly to synth in (no attached box).
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 16:25:16 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Michael A. Dalton ADP OPuS" <miked@PLAZA.DS.ADP.COM>
Subject:      How-To-Make-D4-Triggers....
 
How to Make Triggers for the D4 Drum Machine
============================================
By Mike Dalton (miked@plaza.ds.adp.com)
 
 
FIrst, there is no *one* correct method to
do this.  I will describe the general method I used
and then you can try this along with *your* own
variations.
 
 
The following information will allow you to make
very inexpensive drum pads that play nicely, and
can be used as input triggers to an Alesis D4 drum
sounds rack module.
 
 
THe key here is very simple.  If you want to get
the essential info and start playin' around with
this idea. then do the following:
 
----------------------------------------------------
 
Part 1: The down and dirty "proof of concept"
 
1. Go to Radio Shack and buy 1 or more Piezo buzzers.
Note that there are *many* to choose from.  THe one
that I use is the one that costs $1.49 each (as of 10/94).
 
THey are about the size of a U.S. quarter  (you know, 25 cents..quarter)
and they have two (not three) wires, a red and a black one.
 
They are also enclosed in a black (incredibly rugged) plastic case.
 
Buy two or three of these to experiment with.
 
2. Select one of these to be your first experiment-ee.
Remove the plastic case. *HOW* you remove the plastic case is up to you.
It can be a real pain. *REMEMBER* you do *NOT* want to damage or bend the
side of the black plactic case without the hole.  The side *with* the hole
can literally be broken off a bit at a time by the following: hold the whole
thing firmly and taking a small pair of needle nose pliers, bend the plastic
 case
by grabbing around the small whole.
 
Eventually you'll break enough away to allow you to see into the little black
 case.
 
THat brass-colored flat thing in the bottom is the buzzer. Continure breaking
 the case
away until all you have left is the flat brass colored buzzer with its wires
attached to the white-colored backside.
 
Note. If in the process of extracting the little buzzer from the black case you
pull a wire off, simply resolder it.
 
3. Now remember, this is the "down and dirty" set of instructions, so...
 
Attach a 1/4" phone plug to this thing, with the red lead to the "tip" and the
black wire to the "ring" on the 1/4" plug.
(Note: you'd probably be well advised to lengthen the wires a bit first)
 
4. Plug the whole dangling affair in to a D4 trigger jack and follow the
D4's trigger set-up instructions.
 
5. Tap the small little brass-colored side of the plugged-into-the-D4
buzzer, and lo and behold, DRUM SOUNDS!
 
Okay, enough, now you have proven your inventivness,maybe you are not Thomas A.
 Edison
but the "thrill of it all" has happened. OBVIOUSLY this will work, but even more
OBVIOUSLY you still need to build a drum pad assembly into which you will bury
this wonderful trigger 'thang'.
 
SO, the next set of instructions will describe what *I* have done thus far.
You will *most likely* come up with a better "recipe" (please email it to me
so *I* can benefit too!).
 
Part 2: How I made *my* triggers
--------------------------------
 
 
I went to several local hardware and plumbing supply houses and picked
up a bunch of C_H_E_A_P stuff.  My theory was that something small and
round a few inches deep and wide has probably already been manufactured.
 
I picked up a 5" endcap and a 5" knock out plate for (you guessed it)
5" sewer pipes.
 
Then I did this:
 
 
 ___________________________________________
|___________________________________________| <- 5" circular cut from linoleum
 
 
  <@@@@@@layer of silicon caulking@@@@@@@>
 
      ---------------------------------       <- 4" circular thin metal disc
 
  <@@@@@@layer of 5 minute epoxy @@@@@@>
 
                 ###########                  <- piezo buzzer w/out case
                    |  |
                    |  |
==\ <%%%%layer of thin foam rubber%%%%>  /==
===\____________________________________/===  <- 5" Knock-out plate
                    |  |
                    |  |
                    |  |
||                  |  |                  ||
||                  |  |                  ||
||                  |  |                  ||
||                  |  ----(black)-------------
||                  --(red)--------__/\________  <- RCA Jack
||                                        ||
||========================================||
                    ^
                    |
     5" diameter sewer PVC endcap
 
 
 
               "Dalton's Drum Trigger Cross Section"
 
 
 
I experimented with differant things in the areas of glues to hold
all the pieces, and silicon, hard rubber, soft rubbers, foam rubber,
etc. in the above "recipe". Differant things gave differant bounce
and velocity curves.  Once I had a recipe that worked for my needs,
I Epoxy-glued several of these triggers to drummers "cage" constructed
from 1.25" PVC plumbing pipe and glued with PVC glue.
 
I followed the D4 Manuals instructions for the elemination of false
triggering and mounted a piezo buzzer/trigger to the "cage" itself and
fed it into the D4. This procedure to eleminate false triggering along
with the manuals recommended adjustments to each pad completely eleminated
false triggering.
 
This was a bit of fun to do. Now I can lay down a "boom-chop"
rhythm trak to work the rest ofa song out to, and when its
finished I can go back, erase the referance track, and lay down
the whole drum kit "live-playing" with these triggers. Cooool!
 
Lastly, I bought a  Remo practice pad and put a trigger-epoxied-to-
a-thin-metal-plate (as shown above) in a slit made in the middle of
the foam under the head (take apart a Remo practice pad & you'll
"get it". I mounted a jack, wired the trigger, and viola! I
have a separate snare trigger in addition to the cage.
 
Closing Thoughts:
 
This was actually a great project. I think the Remo idea is as good
as any, but home-made triggers open up alot of inexpensive options to
the MIDI-fied musician.
 
I realized that these little buzzer things are sensitive enough to play
with your fingertips. You guessed it. My next project is to build
a complete trigger-pad-set that is "finger playable"
 
Your mileage may vary...enjoy!
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 20:28:05 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Michael Pelz-Sherman <mps@ACS.USWEST.COM>
Subject:      Re: Musical Interaction on the Infobahn Revisited
 
Don:
 
Mbone looks pretty darn amazing! As you say in the article, "it's not what the
dog has to say, but that the dog can talk at all!". However, there appear to be
two very major problems with using Mbone for group improvisation via the
Internet. For one thing, your article states (on p. 10) that "The audio
interface takes coaching and practice. Leaving your microphone on by mistake
can disrupt a session since typically ***only one person can be understood at a
time***" (emphasis added). In a musical improvisation (or even in normal
conversation), however, this "modal" type of audio connection tends to make
fluid interaction almost impossible. I have been involved in several
long-distance videoconferences where this "one-way" audio interface was used;
most people find it completely unnatural, and it makes for very awkward
interaction at best.
 
Another problem in terms of maximizing public access to the group improvisation
is the bandwidth required. The lowest baud rate your article mentions for video
is 56 Kpbs. Have you measured a minimum baud rate for audio?
 
My general impression from reading the article is that to use Mbone from one's
home, a user would need to have considerable expertise, a very fast machine,
and a direct link to the Internet. Very few individuals posess all that, at
least at present. Nevertheless, I'm sure many readers on these mailing lists
will find your work extremely interesting.
 
Personally I'd like to see something that the "average" computer user could
link into from home using their 2400-baud modem and a cheap MIDI sound module
or sound card. Anything fancier than this would probably place the project
beyond the reach of most members of the Internet music community.
 
Thanks again for your response!
---
Michael Pelz-Sherman                                  \ /  the revolution
UCSD PhD Candidate in Music Theory/Computer Music      \
Software Engineer, Integrity Solutions                /
St. Paul, MN                                          /\  will not
Phone: 612-683-0228                                  /  \
NeXTMail OK!                                        /    /      be televised
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 20:12:35 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Don Brutzman <brutzman@CS.NPS.NAVY.MIL>
Subject:      Re: Musical Interaction on the Infobahn Revisited
In-Reply-To:  <9410110124.AA13999@reliant> from "Michael Pelz-Sherman" at Oct
              10, 94 08:28:05 pm
 
I'm glad you liked the ideas in MBone.  Here are a few more points in
response to your comments:
 
Subsequent to the article, we tried using open mike mode.  It did
permit hands-free use if each (or all) sides have adequate mikes and
levels set.  The speaker/player does mute others but the silence
suppress feature automatically reliquishes control when the speaker
stops, allowing conversation (or call & response) without manual
fumbling.
 
Fidelity of the vat channel approximates that of a telephone, say 3 KHz
audio bandwidth with a corresponding network bandwidth of 50-75 Kbps.
A variety of encodings are available with the vat tool with different
compression schemes and channel bandwidths.  The ivs tool by Thierry
Turletti of INRIA and the nevot tool by Henning Schulzrinne provide
alternate encoding schemes.  Pointers to those tools exist in the
MBone FAQ.
 
I have not seen anyone working on high-fidelity encodings
(20+ KHz audio bandwidth) but there is no technical reason why this is
not possible.  Perhaps someone wants to investigate.  Be advised that
a key limitation on multicast packets is that delivery is not
guaranteed (lost packets stay lost).  For a 24 hour/day proposed audio
stream that is not really a problem.  For local streams, dropout is
very infrequent.  For global streams, packet loss over 10% is usually
infrequent but still intelligible.  Packet loss usually occurs only
when the global internet/MBone is overloaded, or the sending station
is trying to do too many things at once and the audio delivery gets
shortchanged.
 
Occasionally an 'MBone Robot' appears which is a program coupled to a
speech synthesizer that greets people by name when they join the
channel, then reports signal 'quality' parameters such as average
packets dropped.
 
Any type of data stream can be adapted to MBone.  Coworkers at NPS
have ported the IEEE Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) protocol
to multicast, allowing us to run multiple-entity virtual worlds
distributed over the Internet.  Does anyone out there also want to port MIDI?!
Of course it is not enough to put a stream out, you also have to read
it back in.  Giving away code to do this is the best way to get it
accepted.  Usually volunteers can be found to port to different architectures.
Pointers to our DIS multicast code are under NPSNET and AUV at
ftp://taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil/pub/mosaic/nps_mosaic.html
 
Regarding 2400 baud modems... what is the bandwidth of typical MIDI
streams?  Can they support point-to-point MIDI?  Home users might not
be players in any case unless they have faster lines or ISDN.
Alternatively recordings can be stored and downloaded.  Meanwhile
there is a lot of work to make minimally passable tools work with the
lowest possible bandwidth.  My recommendation is to pursue a solution
that works for workstations that are directly connected to the
Internet and the rest will follow along if it is physically possible.
 
regards, Don
--
Don Brutzman                                           work (408) 656-2149
Code OR/Br   Naval Postgraduate School  [Glasgow 204]  fax  (408) 656-2595
Monterey California 93943-5000  USA                    home (408) 372-0190
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 23:20:57 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jim Sain <JSAIN@NERVM.NERDC.UFL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
In-Reply-To:  Message of Mon,
              10 Oct 1994 09:30:05 -0700 from <dbrewer@CALVIN.LINFIELD.EDU>
 
I too am a wind player and longed for a wind controller for many a year.
I recently purchased use a "Windex" (WX7) and love it.  One problem,
they were not very popular and are available *only* on the used market.
You might try one of the vendors listed in Elec Mus Mag like Rogue or
Caruso.  Good luck!
 
Dr. James Paul Sain       University of Florida Electroacoustic Music
jsain@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 23:39:17 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jim Sain <JSAIN@NERVM.NERDC.UFL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
In-Reply-To:  Message of Mon,
              10 Oct 1994 14:37:38 -0700 from <tcollins@CISCO.COM>
 
The WX-7 does have a MIDI interface but because it is a controller
it only has MIDI out.  BTW, I believe the WX-11 is history as well
so grab one if you want one.
 
Dr. James Paul Sain       Unviersity of Florida Electroacoustic Music
jsain@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 22:23:04 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Arne Claassen ISE <claassen@EBS330.EB.UAH.EDU>
Subject:      OutOfPhase software
 
I just found this great little program on infomac. It's called Out of Phase
and is a software synthesizer program. Kind of like Csound, but the interface
makes the whole thing a lot more enjoyable. I wish it had MIDI import tho,
since writing music inside of it appears to be a pain. Otherwise, i need some
time to play with it.
 
It provides
- sample based synthesis
- wavetabel synthesis
- modulation based synthesis
 
it's all tied together by a rather complete looking programming language.
 
Anyone have more info on this program. It doesn't seem to include an address
for the writer. Anyone else use it yet?
 
 
--
Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             <MST3k>
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 10 Oct 1994 21:53:02 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nate Waddoups <natew@HALCYON.COM>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
In-Reply-To:  <199410101743.AA16378@halcyon.com>
 
On Mon, 10 Oct 1994, Magnus Barber wrote:
 
>               I saw a concert last year in which the sax-player had a MIDI
>          microphone in front of the "end bit" (I lack knowledge of the
>          technical terms in wind instruments!!) - from there he'd hooked it
>          up to a sound module - from which wierd and wonderful sounds were
>          emanating! (I guess it *could* have been an FX-box...(?))I really
>
 
When I was looking for a guitar->MIDI device, I spoke with a trumpet player
told me that he had pretty good results using an IVL PitchRider and a
microphone.  The PitchRider is monophonic, though, so I wasn't interested
in using it with my guitar.
 
P.S. I think 'end bit' might be 'bell,' but I'm a guitarist, too...
 
+-------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
| natew@halcyon.com | You write Windows code?  Mac code?  OS/2 PM code?
+-------------------+ Want a great job in the pacific northwest?
                      Send me email, we'll talk...
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 00:03:22 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jeff Wheeler <jwheeler@BIGCAT.MISSOURI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: OutOfPhase software
In-Reply-To:  <9410110423.AA24674@bigcat.missouri.edu>
 
I would also like to know is this software avaiable for pc-compats? And
what are the system requirements?      Ciao, Jeff
 
       ______________________________________________________________
      | Jeffrey K. Wheeler                       |  The Secret to    |
      | jwheeler@bigcat missouri.edu             |  the Universe     |
      |                                          |  is @*&%##...     |
      | 3600 E. Hidden Lane                      |                   |
      | Hartsburg, Missouri  65039-9774   U.S.A. |  NO CARRIER       |
       --------------------------------------------------------------
          "I only know that through music you can reach to God"
                                                    Ali Akbar Khan
 
On Mon, 10 Oct 1994, Arne Claassen ISE wrote:
 
> I just found this great little program on infomac. It's called Out of Phase
> and is a software synthesizer program. Kind of like Csound, but the interface
> makes the whole thing a lot more enjoyable. I wish it had MIDI import tho,
> since writing music inside of it appears to be a pain. Otherwise, i need some
> time to play with it.
>
> It provides
> - sample based synthesis
> - wavetabel synthesis
> - modulation based synthesis
>
> it's all tied together by a rather complete looking programming language.
>
> Anyone have more info on this program. It doesn't seem to include an address
> for the writer. Anyone else use it yet?
>
>
> --
> Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
> On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             <MST3k>
>
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 00:48:21 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Arne Claassen ISE <claassen@EBS330.EB.UAH.EDU>
Subject:      Re: OutOfPhase software
In-Reply-To:  <9410110504.AA17407@ebs330> from "Jeff Wheeler" at Oct 11,
              94 00:03:22 am
 
> I would also like to know is this software avaiable for pc-compats? And
> what are the system requirements?      Ciao, Jeff
 
I only looked at a Mac site, but the docs didn't give any indication that there
was a PC version. Sorry.
 
--
Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             <MST3k>
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 04:55:43 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "L Mccoy (GD 1999)" <mcco5@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
 
For Leo N. (and others who might be interested)
 
 
Xenakis's "Formalized Music" is a book that is a collection of many
articles he has compiled over the last 40 years.  It is difficult reading
if one is not well-versed in mathematics and algebraic logistics, but it
does have chapters entitled "Towards a Metamusic", and "Towards a
Philosophy of Music".  In any event, the text is certainly not dry.
 
In the back of the 92 version, there are 2 programs (in C) that derive
'sieves'.  Unfortunately, there are some mistakes in the program listing,
but these can be de-bugged pretty easily.
 
The book is valuable for many reasons, but most importantly, for the
introduction of theories not normally associated with music into a
pre-compositional (what X calls 'outside-time') framework.  His question to
the serialists was simple, "Why limit onesself to 12?" and "Why is this
music predominantly involved with pitch and essentially static?"  With
the introduction of Stochastics, X was able to deal with larger phenomena.
In the recent music, Xenakis has been exploring various degrees of order
and disorder that certain entities undergo.
 
If you're looking for music that tries to illustrate "happiness" or
"sadness" or some other sort of randomly circumscribed doctrine of
affections, then Xenakis is probably not the cat you'd want to listen to.
But his music is very dramatic, to my ear, and much more 'affective' than
the micro-managed worlds of Babbitt, et al.
 
 
 
 
Has anyone heard some new music by Ferneyhough out in San D.?  I remember
vaguely a listing from someone at UCSD.  What's F doing now?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 19:10:15 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Damien James Miller <943127@EDNA.CC.SWIN.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: OutOfPhase software
In-Reply-To:  <199410110424.AA09525@edna.cc.swin.edu.au>
 
On Mon, 10 Oct 1994, Arne Claassen ISE wrote:
 
> I just found this great little program on infomac. It's called Out of Phase
> and is a software synthesizer program. Kind of like Csound, but the interface
> makes the whole thing a lot more enjoyable. I wish it had MIDI import tho,
> since writing music inside of it appears to be a pain. Otherwise, i need some
> time to play with it.
 
Do you know of an FTP site for this?
 
regards,
Damien
 
**************************************************************************
|   Damien Miller  aka  toado@edna.cc.swin.edu.au  aka  Silicon Dreams   |
|----------------------===========================-----------------------|
|                          CAUTION: WEIRD LOAD                           |
**************************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 10:02:57 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: To pith or not to pith
 
>I was using the word "comparable" in the second sense of the Webster's
>Dictionary, that is "equivalent, similar".
 
Sorry: mine was a knee-jerk reaction to what superficially appeared to be a
"which is best" question (again).
 
The Morph and uWave have a similar, "formant sweep" sound quality in a lot
of cases, and might well have similar modulation facilities. Otherwise,
they're rather different. UWave: single-cycle, 8-bit wavetables of distinct
waves, into lowpass resonant analogue filters. Morpheus: conventional
sample ROM into complex, "morphable" digital multimode filters. Sweeping a
uWave wavetable has the same sorts of harmonic effect as sweeping a
Morpheus filter cube.
 
The other difference is that I have a MicroWave. I don't have a Morpheus. Yet.
 
>BTW, did you upgrade yours to the latest OS?  Is there any computer based
>editing available yet for the MicroWave?
 
I'm running 2.0, yes. The editor I'm using is Adam Schabtach's, for MAX.
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 11:26:06 BST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Chris.Dee" <cad@MARI.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
 
You can play the WX11 without a WT-11, I've got a BT-?? a small wallet
sized powerpack into which you plug the WX and out of which comes the#
midi data stream, I've only ever used it with my wavestation.
 
Is there a wind controller mailing list, I'm v. interested if you have
any futher thoughts on electronic blowing.
 
Chris Dee
Newcastle upon Tyne, England
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 09:00:29 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Harry F.P. Haecker" <haeckerh@OSPREY.NWRC.GOV>
Subject:      Re[2]: To pith or not to pith
 
>Sorry: mine was a knee-jerk reaction to what superficially appeared to be a
>"which is best" question (again).
 
Gotcha, like:
 
"Hey you guys, I just inherited mega-bucks from my dead gramps and wanna buy
the best synthesizer...which is better, cheesecake or filet mignon?"
 
Duh, like uh, it depends on what you're hungry for!
 
>The Morph and uWave... [snip!]
 
Yeah, now that's good info!  Thanks.
 
I've got the sickness bad, Nick.  I'm seriously thinking of cashing in my
retirement for a uWave.  HELP!
 
HFPH
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 11:03:50 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         John Grasett <JGRASETT@FLEMINGC.ON.CA>
Organization: Sir Sandford Fleming College
Subject:      Re: Re[2]: To pith or not to pith
 
> >Sorry: mine was a knee-jerk reaction to what superficially appeared to be a
> >"which is best" question (again).
>
> Gotcha, like:
>
> "Hey you guys, I just inherited mega-bucks from my dead gramps and wanna buy
> the best synthesizer...which is better, cheesecake or filet mignon?"
>
> Duh, like uh, it depends on what you're hungry for!
 
Well, it was my mom, and I already had a WaveStation, and an old
AKAI S900, so I traded my AKIA for a K2000S with 16Mb RAM, now I have
fillet, cheescake, fine wines, caviar, champagne and, if my speakers
can bear it, the kitchen sink!
 
JG
 
 
 
 
 
> >The Morph and uWave... [snip!]
>
> Yeah, now that's good info!  Thanks.
>
> I've got the sickness bad, Nick.  I'm seriously thinking of cashing in my
> retirement for a uWave.  HELP!
>
> HFPH
> John C.S. Grasett - Delivery and Infrastructure Group
                    Information Technology Services Department
                    Sir Sandford Fleming College
                    Frost Campus - Room 180
                    voice:  (705) 324-9144 ext. 3334
                    fax:    (705) 878-3699
 
Randomly selected pearl of wisdom:
 
   'I [may] disaprove of waht you say, but will defend to the death
   your right to say it.'
- Voltaire
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 12:12:31 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Xenakis
 
>
> As for the many instances of phobia of academia that have made their way
> onto the list, I would ask only acceptance of the academics.  There have
> been many wonderful contributions by both those closely associated with
> the University and those who remain adamantly outside.  True, there are
> professors, etc., who operate on fear, just as there are 'outsiders'.
> I would suggest that, in our century when the questions about music start
> dealing more with the 'how' than with the 'what', we might engage in
> accepting 'analysis' and deterministic composition as additional ways of
> experiencing music.
 
I think the best answer to this comes from Harry Haecker in his very well
considered and expressed "To pitch or not to pitch" message of a few days
ago. If you have already deleted that message you should ask him to send
you a copy. Good work Harry. Print out that posting and keep it somewhere
so you can reread it from time to time and remember that that's what your
original ideals were.
 
Harry reminds us that beyond the 'how' and 'what' of music lie the 'who'
(and I'm not talking about Pete Townshend either). It's the
people at the other end of the auditorium or loudspeakers (depending on
whether your music is live or recorded) that determine the relevance of
any musical statement. As a composer you may wish to expand their
consciousness beyond I-IV-V-vi-I, but ... well I've said this all before
and I don't want to repeat myself. Harry says it best: "If there is to be
mutual respect, so that cutting edge music theories are in common use by
and for the public (thereby preserving the fabric of our culture), we've
got to bridge that gap somehow".
 
I have a lot of trouble with the idea of musical analysis as an
alternative way of experiencing music. This is like reading the Hite
reports instead of having sex. Music's whole reason for being is in the
listening. If, after you've finished listening you find yourself saying
"wow, that's great stuff! How did he do that?" then analysis is useful.
 
And before I can be more accepting of academia I have to see some
evidence that they're being a little more accepting of things outside
their own little spheres of interest. Statements like "pitch hasn't been
relevant to contemporary music since Russolo and Henry" only serve to --
well, I can't guess Dr. Corey's intentions in saying this (1000 pardons
if I've misremembered his name), but this kind of attitude often serves
to pump up the ego, and hopefully the status too,  of the person who
makes such a statement on behalf of his own pet theory or comopsitional
technique, by automatically rendering everyone else "irrelevant".
 
If the purpose of innovation is to expand the horizons of what is
possible in music then it ill serves us to discard the usage of the past,
because then you wind up with less rather than more.
 
>
> It is only through fear that music can be 'killed'.
 
There's also boredom, a much more effective way of killing music, in my
opinion.
 
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 11:23:09 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Louis Pape <PAPEL@COLUMBIA.DSU.EDU>
Organization: Dakota State University
Subject:      Re: sequencing software for the IBM-PC
 
If you find some offers of info on free sequencing software for IBM,
especially a 386, I'd like to know!  There was a free demo of
something, but not a complete one about a year ago.  Thanks.  LP
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 12:00:21 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Arne Claassen ISE <claassen@EBS330.EB.UAH.EDU>
Subject:      Re: OutOfPhase software
In-Reply-To:  <9410110911.AA18204@ebs330> from "Damien James Miller" at Oct 11,
              94 07:10:15 pm
 
> Do you know of an FTP site for this?
 
I got it of an infomac mirror. I guess the original infomac site is
sumex-aim.stanford.edu or something. If all fails, i always go through the
mirror site at archie.au.
 
 
--
Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             <MST3k>
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 13:12:17 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Brian Good <bgood@SUNDAGGER.LERC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
In-Reply-To:  <9410111131.AA15885@sundagger.lerc.nasa.gov> from "Chris.Dee" at
              Oct 11, 94 11:26:06 am
 
Chris Dee writes:
 
> Is there a wind controller mailing list, I'm v. interested if you have
> any futher thoughts on electronic blowing.
 
There's a wind-synth mailing list to which you can subscribe by
emailing to listserver@morgan.ucs.mun.ca with the following in
the body of the message:
 
subscribe wind <your name>
 
To post to this list, send messages to wind@morgan.ucs.mun.ca
 
The list is not as active as emusic-l or synth-l.  There are
periods of intense activity, followed by weeks of coma.  The list
is active right now, though the current topic ("does anyone on
the face of the planet know how to play a soprano sax in tune?")
is not particulary synth-related.
 
brian good
nasa LeRC
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 19:09:26 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Michel.Fingerhut@IRCAM.FR
Subject:      Graphical DSP Applications Development Position / Paris, France
 
                  Analysis/Synthesis Group: Graphical DSP
                  ***************************************
                     Applications Development Position
                     *********************************
 
 
IRCAM is a leading non-profit organization of musical creation, r&d and
education in acoustics and music, located in the center of Paris (France),
next to the Pompidou Center.  A position is immediately available in the
analysis-synthesis group for 6 months (detailed activities of IRCAM and
its groups on our WWW server, http://www.ircam.fr).
 
The candidate will develop digital signal (sound) processing and visualisation
tools on Unix platforms, in C and/or C++, under X/Motif/Open-GL.
 
REQUIRED EXPERIENCE
===================
 
 o Good experience in C and C++ programming on Unix platforms under
   X11/Motif/OpenGL of medium-sized projects
 o High productivity, methodical work, excellent programming style
 
DESIRED EXPERIENCE
==================
 
 o Experience in digital signal processing
 
SALARY AND TERM
===============
 
13,200 FFrs/month (before tax) + 10% paid vacations
 
AVAILABILITY
============
 
Now, to start November 1st. EEC WORKING PAPERS REQUIRED: in order to
start on said date, the candidate must have EEC citizenship or already
own valid EEC working papers.
 
TO APPLY
========
 
Please send your resume, detailing qualifications and addressing the above
points to rod@ircam.fr
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 17:00:29 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         JANUSZ PODRAZIK <Janusz@PODRAZIK.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:      MIDI->TEXT->MIDI
 
Is the any software converting MIDI to Text and Text to MIDI.
'TabConvertet V.0.8 of 14 April 1988' do not work with Finale or StudioVision.
I need the software for microtonal modification.
 
Janusz@podrazik.demon.co.uk
 
 
Janusz P.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 11:43:21 -0600
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Bet my hair is longer than yours! <doug@SUN1PAZTCN.WR.USGS.GOV>
Subject:      Re: MIDI->TEXT->MIDI
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Tue,
              11 Oct 1994 17:00:29 -0000." <01HI5D8VQTOIBCBBJC@Arizona.EDU>
 
Janusz P wrote:
>Is the any software converting MIDI to Text and Text to MIDI.
>'TabConvertet V.0.8 of 14 April 1988' do not work with Finale or StudioVision.
 
If my guess is correct, you'll need to save your work as a MIDI file, not
as the default Finale or StudioVision proprietary file.  (Hmm, there's
that "proprietary" word again...)
 
-Doug
 
Doug Wellington
doug@sun1paztcn.wr.usgs.gov
System and Network Administrator
US Geological Survey
Tucson, AZ Project Office
 
According to proposed Federal guidelines, this message is a "non-record".
Hmm, I wonder if _everything_ I say is a "non-record"...
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 13:12:37 +2731200
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@HEINOUS.ISCA.UIOWA.EDU>
Organization: Heinous Owners Club And Persons With Nine Letter Names
Subject:      Clash of opposing viewpoints, Part Deux
In-Reply-To:  <199410111629.LAA22917.198A7@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
 
On Tue, 11 Oct 1994, Mark G Simon wrote:
 
> Harry reminds us that beyond the 'how' and 'what' of music lie the 'who'
> (and I'm not talking about Pete Townshend either). It's the
> people at the other end of the auditorium or loudspeakers (depending on
> whether your music is live or recorded) that determine the relevance of
> any musical statement. As a composer you may wish to expand their
> consciousness beyond I-IV-V-vi-I, but ... well I've said this all before
> and I don't want to repeat myself. Harry says it best: "If there is to be
> mutual respect, so that cutting edge music theories are in common use by
> and for the public (thereby preserving the fabric of our culture), we've
> got to bridge that gap somehow".
 
Yes, to an extent, Harry is correct.  However, the history of "Western Art
Music" (or whatever we might call it) is full of examples of composers who
were rejected or disfavored by their contemporary audiences.  Beethoven's
popularity was rather limited during his lifetime.  Bach was widely
regarded as inferior to Teleman.  What has become of the infinitely
popular Meyerbeer, or Hummel, or Clementi, or Dittersdorf?
 
I'm not aware of any contemporary critic whose view of Symphony #9 is so
negative as the views of this work held by many of Beethoven's
contemporaries.  It would be incorrect to infer Schoenberg's value from
this, but it would also be incorrect to ignore this in order to dismiss
Arnold.
 
> I have a lot of trouble with the idea of musical analysis as an
> alternative way of experiencing music. This is like reading the Hite
> reports instead of having sex. Music's whole reason for being is in the
> listening. If, after you've finished listening you find yourself saying
> "wow, that's great stuff! How did he do that?" then analysis is useful.
 
Well, there are many different ways of defining what you mean by
"analysis".  {Attn:  obligatory e-music content approaching} What human
ears do is very much like Fourier analysis.  People who are actively
listening are also actively analyzing.  It seems very clear to me that all
ways of listening to music are, in some sense, analytical.  Heck, merely
noticing that a piece has started or stopped is analytical.
 
> And before I can be more accepting of academia I have to see some
> evidence that they're being a little more accepting of things outside
> their own little spheres of interest. Statements like "pitch hasn't been
> relevant to contemporary music since Russolo and Henry" only serve to --
> well, I can't guess Dr. Corey's intentions in saying this (1000 pardons
> if I've misremembered his name), but this kind of attitude often serves
> to pump up the ego, and hopefully the status too,  of the person who
> makes such a statement on behalf of his own pet theory or comopsitional
> technique, by automatically rendering everyone else "irrelevant".
 
From Ptolemy to Boethius to Rameau to Schenker, it seems to me that most
of the talk about music favors pitch at the expense of rhythm and timbre.
Now, Mark, if you have a "pet theory" that can explain why pitch is more
important than these for the sake of *music*, as Ross Perot says, I'm all
ears.
 
So far as the "sphere of interest" of academia are concerned, this seems
to be a question of all aspects of academia, not just one of academics in
music, much less just composers.
 
I think Whitney Houston is a great singer, and I'm quite convinced that I
hold this opinion because of the timbre of her voice, and not the pitches
upon which she lands.  Ditto for the voices of Captain Beefheart, Kurt
Schwitters and Harry Partch.
 
> If the purpose of innovation is to expand the horizons of what is
> possible in music then it ill serves us to discard the usage of the past,
> because then you wind up with less rather than more.
 
Quite true.  But who has actually discarded the usage of the past?  I play
Beethoven and Elton John on the piano all the time.  Doesn't mean I want
to write that way, though.  By all means, keep the music of the past, but
don't try to reinvent it or rehash it.
 
> > It is only through fear that music can be 'killed'.
>
> There's also boredom, a much more effective way of killing music, in my
> opinion.
 
And, there's misinformation, and misconceptions, and good intentions
lining the road to the place where everyone dances to Offenbach played on
accordions and bagpipes.  All of these turn people off, and once the folks
have been turned off, it matters little how they got there.
 
***
 
I have this suspicion that Mark and I might agree on a lot of things that
we haven't talked about yet, but so far, I know more about what he
dislikes than about what he likes.
 
-- Kirk
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dr. Kirk Corey                 [insert       Electronic Systems Administrator
kirk-corey@uiowa.edu          disclaimer                      School of Music
                                here]                  The University of Iowa
    "Msdos?  MSDOS? I've seen CALCULATORS with a better operating system!"
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 16:54:49 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Clash of opposing viewpoints, Part Deux
 
>
> Yes, to an extent, Harry is correct.  However, the history of "Western Art
> Music" (or whatever we might call it) is full of examples of composers who
> were rejected or disfavored by their contemporary audiences.  Beethoven's
> popularity was rather limited during his lifetime.  Bach was widely
> regarded as inferior to Teleman.  What has become of the infinitely
> popular Meyerbeer, or Hummel, or Clementi, or Dittersdorf?
 
Beethoven was very quickly accepted by all but the strictest of
conservatives as the greatest composer of his day. Bach's reputation was
admitedly more local in nature, but he was not anywhere nearly as
neglected after his death as popular legend has it. There are actually
very few of the greats who didn't find some kind of recognition during
their lifetime. The "75 year posthumous acceptance" theory is a lot more
comforting to living struggling composers, though.
 
>
> Well, there are many different ways of defining what you mean by
> "analysis".  {Attn:  obligatory e-music content approaching} What human
> ears do is very much like Fourier analysis.  People who are actively
> listening are also actively analyzing.  It seems very clear to me that all
> ways of listening to music are, in some sense, analytical.  Heck, merely
> noticing that a piece has started or stopped is analytical.
 
I find nothing to disagree with here. I listen very analytically. I was
thinking of the kind of pc analysis (double meaning here: means both
pitch class and politically correct) one finds in the Journal of Music
Theory that read like calculus treatises, and more recently include all
manner of vector graphs. Even assuming I could plow through these
articles I don't think they're going to change the way I listen to the
music.
>
>
> >From Ptolemy to Boethius to Rameau to Schenker, it seems to me that most
> of the talk about music favors pitch at the expense of rhythm and timbre.
> Now, Mark, if you have a "pet theory" that can explain why pitch is more
> important than these for the sake of *music*, as Ross Perot says, I'm all
> ears.
 
I have no pet theories of this nature.
 
> I think Whitney Houston is a great singer, and I'm quite convinced that I
> hold this opinion because of the timbre of her voice, and not the pitches
> upon which she lands.  Ditto for the voices of Captain Beefheart, Kurt
> Schwitters and Harry Partch.
 
You could always sample them (he said, suddenly morphing into another
"hot topic").
 
> > If the purpose of innovation is to expand the horizons of what is
> > possible in music then it ill serves us to discard the usage of the past,
> > because then you wind up with less rather than more.
>
> Quite true.  But who has actually discarded the usage of the past?  I play
> Beethoven and Elton John on the piano all the time.  Doesn't mean I want
> to write that way, though.  By all means, keep the music of the past, but
> don't try to reinvent it or rehash it.
 
So why not put a little Beethoven and Elton John into your music? I find
the idea fascinating, especially if you can manage to put them both into
the same piece. If you've done your job well it won't really sound like
either Beethoven or Elton John, hopefully it will sound like you.
(Actually it would probably sound more like me, since this the kind of
thing I like to do. Composition professors tried to squash this out of my
system to no avail).
 
> ***
>
> I have this suspicion that Mark and I might agree on a lot of things that
> we haven't talked about yet, but so far, I know more about what he
> dislikes than about what he likes.
 
I must certainly apologize for having dragged your name into my ramblings
once again. If you were to examine my record collection you'd be amused
at all the academic stuff I felt compelled to buy. Though I lash out at
great swaths of music, I have to judge individual pieces on an individual
basis.
 
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 20:37:47 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Wind MIDI controllers...
 
>I am not sure, but I don't believe that the WX-7 has a
>MIDI interface.
 
The WX-7 has a dedicated cable to a strap-on box which serves as PSU and
MIDI interface.
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 19:24:16 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: resonant frequency
 
>of much LESS significance is the fact that while quietly humming to myself
>in a stall in the men's room, i discovered that the resonant frequency
>of the stall was roughly the 2nd G below middle C.  i found that no
>matter how quietly i hummed the G the volume in the stall was the same.
>i could go up a step and there was no resonance; all i heard was me.
 
Yep - I used to be able to do this in the shower stall of a place where I
used to live. It had sliding glass doors, so it, like the bathroom stall,
was almost perfect for setting up standing waves. Any relatively small
closed space such as these can be experimented with; you may actually be
able to hit another resonant frequency if you have sufficient range in your
singing voice.
 
Expect odd looks from people when you come out, though. :)
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"At the end of the hour, we'll have information on the sedatives used by
the artists,,," (MST3K)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 19:10:12 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Siberian Khatru <jsouthwo@KELLER.CLARKE.EDU>
Subject:      Help in C
 
        No, that's not C as in "the key of...", it's C as in the
programming language.
        My friend (a computer science major) and I (a music major) are
collaborating on writing a series of very simplistic ear training
programs for PC.  I'm using routines from Jim Conger's series on MIDI
programming in C from _Electronic Musician_ (September '89-November
'89).  The problem I'm having is that I'm using his put_cmd() function
for the MIDI output.  This command sends one byte of MIDI info down the
lines at a time.  My question is this:  How do I tell the keyboard to
play a "C" for a duration of one second (or one beat in MM=60) followed
by a "D" for the same duration?  I think I understand how to set-up the
first note (NOTE-ON, PITCH, VELOCITY) but how to I time the NOTE-OFF and
the subsequent NOTE-ON of the second pitch?  This is the last part of the
program which needs to be written.
        As an off-shoot, how would I produce the two notes at the same
time?  (I'm thinking:  NOTE-ON1,PITCH1,VELOCITY1 directly followed by
NOTE-ON2,PITCH2,VELOCITY2).  Is this correct?  My main concern is
determining duration, I guess.
 
Cheers,
 
Jon Southwood
jsouthwo@keller.clarke.edu
 
******************************************************************************
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem.  They're there every night, they
see it done every night, the see how it should be done every night, but
they can't do it themselves."-Brendan Behan
******************************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 17:37:36 -0600
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Bet my hair is longer than yours! <doug@SUN1PAZTCN.WR.USGS.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Help in C
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Tue,
              11 Oct 1994 19:10:12 CDT." <01HI5OZTM3RMBCBFVU@Arizona.EDU>
 
Jon Southwood wrote:
>        My friend (a computer science major) and I (a music major) are
>collaborating on writing a series of very simplistic ear training
>programs for PC.  I'm using routines from Jim Conger's series on MIDI
>programming in C from _Electronic Musician_ (September '89-November
>'89).  The problem I'm having is that I'm using his put_cmd() function
>for the MIDI output.  This command sends one byte of MIDI info down the
>lines at a time.  My question is this:  How do I tell the keyboard to
>play a "C" for a duration of one second (or one beat in MM=60) followed
>by a "D" for the same duration?  I think I understand how to set-up the
>first note (NOTE-ON, PITCH, VELOCITY) but how to I time the NOTE-OFF and
>the subsequent NOTE-ON of the second pitch?  This is the last part of the
>program which needs to be written.
 
OK, I haven't read the EM articles, but I have a couple questions...
1) Are you using a "real" MPU-401 or a board that emulates the MPU-401
   intelligent mode or do you have some other kind of board? (SoundBlaster...)
2) Are there any timing routines in Jim Conger's library?
3) What compiler are you using?
 
Simply put, if you don't have an MPU-401 or clone, you'll have to do
the timing yourself.  There are a couple ways, but if you don't need
a very high timing resolution, you can just listen to the standard
system timer.  It has a resolution of something like 1/18 second, so
it should get you close.  If you want better resolution, you'll have
to write (or find) a routine to change the timing resolution and then
grab that.  (Email me if that is what you want to do, and I'll direct
you to some code.)
 
If you _do_ have an MPU-401 or clone, then you can use its intelligent
mode to do the timing for you.
 
Let me know what the answers to my three questions are, and I should be
able to come up with some more defined answers...
 
 
>        As an off-shoot, how would I produce the two notes at the same
>time?  (I'm thinking:  NOTE-ON1,PITCH1,VELOCITY1 directly followed by
>NOTE-ON2,PITCH2,VELOCITY2).  Is this correct?  My main concern is
>determining duration, I guess.
 
That's correct, just send out the note on messages at the same time.
As for duration, again, you can either have the "intelligent" mode
take care of it for you, or you'll have to time it yourself...
 
-Doug
 
Doug Wellington
doug@sun1paztcn.wr.usgs.gov
System and Network Administrator
US Geological Survey
Tucson, AZ Project Office
 
According to proposed Federal guidelines, this message is a "non-record".
Hmm, I wonder if _everything_ I say is a "non-record"...
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 10:15:34 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: More fee us
 
>of timbre-- not neccessarily better, just more parameters of sound
>manipulation.  Does the Morpheus exclusively use ROM based samples, or
>can one import sounds via SMDI or SDX?  I understand that the MicroWave
>has a closed number of wave cycles.  That's OK by me, since the permutations
>sound ENORMOUS.
 
ROM only (damn)
It seems that ALOT of synth makers have given up on the idea.
With the TS-10 it seems that Ensoniq were saying "Oh Mom, Do we HAVE to?" with
their implimentation of sample RAM.
Only Kurzweil have done it properly.
 
Regards
 
David O'Donoghoe
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM.AU
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 22:57:37 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Phil Skiba <SPS5251@SIENA.BITNET>
Subject:      solid state vs. tube
 
Since we are amidst the analog/digital debate, I thought I would throw this
out.  People are always arguing about "tone" out of tube amplifiers as
opposed to solid state amps.  Now, I understand that with solid state, you
lose certain harmonics because of the nature of the beast, and that is why
solid state sounds "sterile".  Could someone explain to me why that is?
Advertisers are constantly talking about devices to "tubify" solid state
amps, i.e. throwing a box with a couple of 12ax7 tubes into the signal
chain.
 
wouldn't any "harmonics" reinforced there be lost again by sending it through
a solid state amp?
 
thanks
Phil
sps5251@siena.bitnet
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 22:56:04 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         HARRY HAECKER <BTHAEC@LSUVM.SNCC.LSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: More fee us
In-Reply-To:  Message of Wed,
              12 Oct 1994 10:15:34 +1000 from <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
 
David says:
 
>It seems that ALOT  of synth makers have given up on the idea (of
>sample RAM)  >snip!<
>Only Kurzweil has done it properly
 
Amen!
 
That's *exactly* why Y/C got my $$: I wanted an open ended synth, one whose
OS was supported for upgrades (AT LEAST for the next few years!), and which
wouldn't run out of waves.  So far I haven't seen any of the "flakiness"
that I read about on the K2000 list (gently knock on the module...),
but only time will tell just how sturdy she is.
 
later,  HFPH
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 00:09:24 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Eugene <C619285@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Help in C
In-Reply-To:  Message of Tue,
              11 Oct 1994 19:10:12 -0500 from <jsouthwo@KELLER.CLARKE.EDU>
 
Hey Jon,
You have a great nom de plume! I'm a major YES fan....
 
Eugene
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 00:28:15 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Eugene <C619285@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: solid state vs. tube
In-Reply-To:  Message of Tue, 11 Oct 1994 22:57:37 -0500 from <SPS5251@SIENA>
 
On Tue, 11 Oct 1994 22:57:37 -0500 you said:
>Since we are amidst the analog/digital debate, I thought I would throw this
>out.  People are always arguing about "tone" out of tube amplifiers as
>opposed to solid state amps.  Now, I understand that with solid state, you
>lose certain harmonics because of the nature of the beast, and that is why
>solid state sounds "sterile".  Could someone explain to me why that is?
>Advertisers are constantly talking about devices to "tubify" solid state
>amps, i.e. throwing a box with a couple of 12ax7 tubes into the signal
>chain.
>
>wouldn't any "harmonics" reinforced there be lost again by sending it through
>a solid state amp?
>
>thanks
>Phil
>sps5251@siena.bitnet
 
Tube amps, for whatever reason, sound better than solid-state amps. The main
drawback is that unless you have a staff of roadies to cater to the mercurial
whims of the beast, what sounded good in the store three months ago sounds
like crap today. Merely changing the tubes does not help, as a complicated
proceedure called "tube biasing" must be performed. For the touring musician
a dependable solid-state amp is the necessary sacrifice he or she must make
for the sake of reliability.
 
Eugene
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 11:33:18 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jim Gardner <jim@KIOSK.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:      Ferneyhough Infough
 
"L Mccoy (GD 1999)" <mcco5@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
Wrote:
 
>Has anyone heard some new music by Ferneyhough out in San D.?  I remember
>vaguely a listing from someone at UCSD.  What's F doing now?
 
"On Stellar Magnitudes" for soprano, flute, clarinet, piano, violin and
cello was premiered on 3 September at Royaumont, performed by Ensemble
Contrechamps and Katherine Ciesinski. Subsequent performances by this
ensemble, and the Nieuw Ensemble and Ensemble Recherche are happening now
in Europe until November.
 
A String Trio, commissioned by Ensemble Contrechamps is due next year.
 
Please e-mail me personally for further information.
 
Jim
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 11:33:53 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jim Gardner <jim@KIOSK.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:      Sex and Academia?
 
Well that subject line got you reading anyway!
 
Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Wrote:
 
>I have a lot of trouble with the idea of musical analysis as an
>alternative way of experiencing music. This is like reading the Hite
>reports instead of having sex.
 
Only if you do analysis *instead* of listening.  Let's face it, a little
background anatomical knowledge can certainly help one's enjoyment of sex -
but I would certainly prefer to experience an orgasm than see which of my
synapses and neurotransmitters are working during one.
 
The problem of analysis is one of appropriateness to the object in
question.  It should enhance and inform, never *replace*.
 
>Music's whole reason for being is in the
>listening. If, after you've finished listening you find yourself saying
>"wow, that's great stuff! How did they do that?" then analysis is useful.
 
Sure, although there can be layers of organised material in a piece that
may be appreciated away from the actual listening experience.  If you also
get off on the listening experience of that piece, then you've got more to
enjoy!  More bang for your buck, so to speak.
 
If I may digress a little, I feel I should point out that my point of entry
into this 'avant-garde'/'academic'/'anal-white-person' music [delete where
applicable] was *NOT* via an academy or music course.  I started out
listening to whatever was left over in my brother's record collection,
things on the radio [Thank God for Radio 3 and public libraries!!] and just
followed up what sounded good to me.  I suspect that a lot of the apparent
academaphobia in this list comes from you poor buggers who had to
grudgingly do exercises in 12 tone counterpoint or whatever to get a good
grade.  No-one should *have* to go through that crap before they can be
'legitimised' as a musician or composer, but please don't carry this
resentment for the rest of your life.
 
>Composition professors tried to squash this out of my
>system to no avail
 
I'm glad you resisted, but how did you end up in a place like this anyway?
 
I'm reminded of a something Stockhausen said about the reception of one of
his pieces (possibly 'Kontakte')
something like "People analyse the music, smoke dope to it, make love to
it, but very few people get out the headphones and really *listen* to it.
 
Surely this, with as open a mind as you can manage, is the way in to *any*
music that isn't produced as a mere accompaniment to another activity.
 
A lot of the discussions on this thread are actually hinting at something
deeper, and that is the place of and perceived utility of music in a
capitalist/ industrialised society.  I'm a little disturbed at the way
"success" or "relevance" seems to be judged here on the numbers of people
who consume the music.
 
>It's the
>people at the other end of the auditorium or loudspeakers (depending on
>whether your music is live or recorded) that determine the relevance of
>any musical statement.
 
This is fine, as long as you're not equating "absolute relevance" with the
number of people at the other end, or worse, disallowing those who fall
beneath a "relevance threshold".
 
I agree that the idea of music as a genuinely communal human activity is
under threat.  Fewer distinctive manufacturers, more passive consumers.
This is the crux of the biscuit. [Harry Haecker]
 
>Statements like "pitch hasn't been
>relevant to contemporary music since Russolo and Henry"
 
I really don't understand what he was getting at either, Mark.  Which
'contemporary' music are you talking about? Just because you aren't
*organising* or *prioritising* the pitch content of a piece doesn't mean
it's not there!
 
>There's also boredom, a much more effective way of killing music, in my
>opinion.
 
Well I think I know what you mean, but many things I thought were 'boring'
I now enjoy, and things I thought were 'bitchen' years ago now bore the
pants off me.  I think it's more a case of "You can lead a horse to
water..." I would have had a very hard time enjoying music if someone had
come up to me and said "you *will* like this.
 
then "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@HEINOUS.ISCA.UIOWA.EDU> wrote:
 
> What human
>ears do is very much like Fourier analysis.
 
In what way? I have read nothing to support this view, although I would
heartily recommend Justine Sergent's insightful article 'Mapping the
Musician Brain' (Human Brain Mapping 1:20-38 (1993)) to get a good overview
of the pitfalls and confusions that exist with both music theoreticians and
neurologists in this field.
 
> People who are actively
>listening are also actively analyzing.  It seems very clear to me that all
>ways of listening to music are, in some sense, analytical.
 
Sure, but this depends a great deal on acculturation and musical training.
 
then Mark wrote:
 
>There are actually
>very few of the greats who didn't find some kind of recognition during
>their lifetime.
 
But *how* is this 'recognition' acheived and judged, and how is the music
disseminated??
 
>If you were to examine my record collection you'd be amused
>at all the academic stuff I felt compelled to buy
 
an inner compulsion or compelled by a course listening list?
 
>Of course, I've probably been grinding my axe with the "traditional"
>four-semester theory sequence of 101: Pitch, 102: More Pitch, 103:
>Advanced Pitchology and 104: Pitch Revisited for about as long as some of
>my distinguished colleagues have been chanting "Schoenberg and Webern and
>Berg, oh my!"* :)
 
I get the impression that there's something deeply wrong with US musical
academia.
 
>Of course my official position on Xenakis today is that he's one of those
>@#&%!!!! academics.
 
Why? Have you listened to anything he's written over the last 15 years or
so? I think of this music as visceral and intuitive, albeit over an
organised substrate.  If you can, hear it live, but failing that, I'd
recommend the Arditti Quartet/Claude Helffer CD of chamber music from
1955-1990 (Disques Montaigne CD 782005) and the Asko ensemble's 'Live 1'
Xenakis CD (Attacca/Babel 9054-1).  If think that if you listen to
'Echange' or 'Palimpsest' or 'Kottos' or 'Embellie' you might change your
opinion.  OK you might still think it's crap, but I don't think you'd think
of it as *academic* crap!
 
By the way Harry Haecker - you bring up some good points, I think, but I
must go.  I'm sorry to have fallen so far behind with these stimulating
discussions, but I have to pay for the Xenakis CDs somehow.  Hope this one
continues...
 
Jim Gardner
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 11 Oct 1994 16:32:11 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Brian Bovaird <Brian41292@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: wind controllers
 
You mentioned >> c programming language using Carnegie-Mellon's C. Music Kit
as an interface
for MIDI.<<
 
Where can I find this kit and can you tell me what it provides compare to any
other C compiler - ie. Turbo C?
 
Brian Bovaird
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 08:41:38 +2620200
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@HEINOUS.ISCA.UIOWA.EDU>
Organization: Heinous Owners Club And Persons With Nine Letter Names
Subject:      Ears and beers (was: Sex and Academia?)
In-Reply-To:  <199410121138.GAA26025.198A7@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
 
On Wed, 12 Oct 1994, Jim Gardner wrote:
 
> > What human
> >ears do is very much like Fourier analysis.
>
> In what way? I have read nothing to support this view, although I would
> heartily recommend Justine Sergent's insightful article 'Mapping the
> Musician Brain' (Human Brain Mapping 1:20-38 (1993)) to get a good overview
> of the pitfalls and confusions that exist with both music theoreticians and
> neurologists in this field.
 
The following is from Donald E. Hall, _Musical Acoustics_; Wadsworth
Publishing, 1980:
 
"Different frequencies preferentially produce motion of different parts of
the basilar membrane, so that different fibers of the auditory nerve
receive the greatest stimulation."
 
In other words, the different fibers of the auditory nerve correspond to
the different frequency bins in Fourier analysis, and the amount of
stimulation of these nerves corresponds to the amplitude stored in the
frequency bins.
 
In this way the ear mechanically analyzes the frequency content of an
incoming waveform.
 
This view of the ear helps to explain why two stable waveforms which have
identical spectral content but ostensibly different shapes (because of
different phase relations of their partials) are obviously different on an
oscilloscope but generally indistinguishable via loudspeakers.
 
-- Kirk
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dr. Kirk Corey                 [insert       Electronic Systems Administrator
kirk-corey@uiowa.edu          disclaimer                      School of Music
                                here]                  The University of Iowa
    "Msdos?  MSDOS? I've seen CALCULATORS with a better operating system!"
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 10:23:12 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Burton Beerman <BBEERMA@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      wind controllers
 
> can you use the yamaha -7 directly, i.e. does a midi cord come out
> that I can plug into my synth, or does that also require a box as
> does the wt-11.
 
>I am not sure, but I don't believe that the WX-7 has a
>MIDI interface.  I don't own one, so maybe someone who does
>can answer this.
 
Yes, the wx7 has no attached voice modules and has a MIDI out cord that goes
directly to your own voice module (seems to love Proteus modules for variable
velocity)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 00:37:40 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Curt Haptonstal <CurtH3@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: sequencing software
 
Try WinJammer.  It's a good program and makes Standard Midi Files.
             CurtH3
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 10:47:46 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Biff Padiduwitz <WSCOTT@ACS.WOOSTER.EDU>
Subject:      Re: resonant frequency
 
True factoid: the resonant frequency of a bowl of jelly the size
of a human brain is 8-13 hz. This, by the way is the same as alpha
waves in the EEG.
 
BIll Scott
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 09:04:02 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Ned Kartchner <nedk@SERV39.C29CAE.CHINALAKE.NAVY.MIL>
Subject:      Re: solid state vs. tube
 
Comparing vacuum tube amplifiers and those using solid state devices, one
must consider several factors.  Both types of amplifiers are used to drive
low impedance speakers (4, 8, 16 ohms).  This is desirable because of the
need to locate the speakers, often long distances from the driving amps.
High impedance lines are very susceptible to noise and the 60 cycle currents
which are hard to eliminate.  We must remember that filters don't work in
all cases because 60 cycles is also part of the music we like to hear.
 
Vacuum tube amplifiers are devices which generally require circuits which
are high impedance.  A vacuum tube amplifier then must have an impedance
matching device included, which will match the high impedance of the
tubes to the low impedance speakers.  These devices are matching
transformers.  Good matching transformers are expensive, they are heavy,
and their frequency response is limited to 30 hz to 20-30 kilohertz.
 
Solid state amplifiers are low impedance circuits which need no matching
transformers.  They can amplify frequences from near DC to 100 kilohertz
and above.
 
When sounds are being amplified by either type of circuit we must consider
that at least three things are variables which we have little control over.
The first of these is: Each person has a different feeling for what is
good sound.  That will change from time to time because of the type of music,
the mood, and the mechanics of the person (effects of good ears, ear wax,
colds, etc) Our ears are not linear devices and what sounds good at low levels
may sound bad at higher levels.  Second is: The output drivers (speakers)
color the sounds themselves.  The cabinets which the speakers are mounted in
effect the sounds, and the room, its shape, wall surfaces, temperature and
humidiy, along with the crowd itself are factors to consider.  A third
factor we can not change is nostalgia.  We can never duplicate that special
feeling we had when we first heard a great song.  We were in love, we had
just lost a love, we were young, we were with a great crowd etc.  These
things coupled with physical things which can be measured effect our
impression of, if the final sound is good.
 
So far I have talked about pure and undistorted sounds.  When a musician
adds noise, reverb, phasing, and all those things modern electronics can
do, new problems come into the picture.  A vacuum tube amplifier has a
characteristic which, when over driven, begins to change its frequency
response.  The harmonics of the sounds begin to take on a special nature
and this is when the "Tube Freaks" say that is the sound we are looking for.
Solid state amps don't respond to being overdriven the same way.  In fact,
over driven solid state amplifiers tend to put out square waves which have
lots of odd harmonics, lots of high frequencies which put much of the power
into the tweeters and they burn out.  There are tube type preamps which
can be set to overdrive and give a type of tube sound which then can be
used to drive solid state amplifiers.
 
I don't expect for the "fight" between tube sounds and solid state
sounds to be resolved until a new device or circuit is developed which
will give a choice between the two, in the same amp.  More likely, the
price of vacuum tubes will become so expensive that even Soviet Block
countries won't be making them for their old obsolete devices.
 
Then, there is the factor that most of those who remember that old
vacuum tube sound are now wearing hearing aids.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 12:19:19 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Sex and Academia?
 
>
> Only if you do analysis *instead* of listening.  Let's face it, a little
> background anatomical knowledge can certainly help one's enjoyment of sex -
> but I would certainly prefer to experience an orgasm than see which of my
> synapses and neurotransmitters are working during one.
 
I wonder if there are any frequencies that will stimulate said synapses
and neurotransmitters. Anyone have any anecdotes on this?
 
> followed up what sounded good to me.  I suspect that a lot of the apparent
> academaphobia in this list comes from you poor buggers who had to
> grudgingly do exercises in 12 tone counterpoint or whatever to get a good
> grade.  No-one should *have* to go through that crap before they can be
> 'legitimised' as a musician or composer, but please don't carry this
> resentment for the rest of your life.
 
I think (hope) that some of the rigid attitudes that used to hold sway 10
years ago are disappearing. I recently had an opportunity to talk to
William Bolcom, who was at Ithaca College giving an informal seminar, and
he recalled the restrictive atmostphere he had to live with during his
student days in the late 50's and early 60's and how, later, when he
wrote his Graceful Ghost Rag his fellow faculty members were scandalized
that he should write such a thing. He said he was glad that the
"Stalinist" era in composition was over. He was astounded when I told him
of how I had written a piece in memory of John Lennon, had my
assistantship promptly taken away, only to be reinstated when I had
written some appropriately aggressive 12-tone music. "You mean this still
happens?" Probably if I had gone to U. of Michigan my attitude would have
been much different.
 
>
> >Composition professors tried to squash this out of my
> >system to no avail
>
> I'm glad you resisted, but how did you end up in a place like this anyway?
 
I'm a cataloger in the library, not a professor.
 
>
> A lot of the discussions on this thread are actually hinting at something
> deeper, and that is the place of and perceived utility of music in a
> capitalist/ industrialised society.  I'm a little disturbed at the way
> "success" or "relevance" seems to be judged here on the numbers of people
> who consume the music.
 
Yes, on the one hand it's "how many" and on the other it's "how few".
 
> This is fine, as long as you're not equating "absolute relevance" with the
> number of people at the other end, or worse, disallowing those who fall
> beneath a "relevance threshold".
 
Numbers are irrelevant. I can deal with contemporary music, or any other
music I choose to identify with appealing only to small numbers, but when
the numbers are infinitesmally tiny, then I start getting queasy.
>
> Well I think I know what you mean, but many things I thought were 'boring'
> I now enjoy, and things I thought were 'bitchen' years ago now bore the
> pants off me.
 
Same here. This shows you're still listening with your brain, which I am
all in favor of.
>
> >There are actually
> >very few of the greats who didn't find some kind of recognition during
> >their lifetime.
>
> But *how* is this 'recognition' acheived and judged, and how is the music
> disseminated??
 
I don't think there's a person on this list who wouldn't like to have an
answer to this.
>
> >If you were to examine my record collection you'd be amused
> >at all the academic stuff I felt compelled to buy
>
> an inner compulsion or compelled by a course listening list?
 
My own curiosity. You can't say something sux if you haven't heard it
[:^)]. Plus, some of this stuff I genuinely like. I generally buy
anything written by Michael Tippett, my favorite living composer. I'll
try and borrow a copy of that Arditti Xenakis disc.
 
My copy of Baker's indicates that Xenakis hasn't done any electronic
pieces in quite a while. Is this true? I think his strong suit is the
sonorities he manages to come up with, and I can imagine he'd be one hell
of a synth programmer.
 
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 13:56:36 -0500
Reply-To:     RDEWEY@gasou.edu
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was RDEWEY@GSVMS2.CC.GASOU.EDU
From:         Russ Dewey <RDEWEY@GASOU.EDU>
Subject:      Free sequencers
 
> Date:    Tue, 11 Oct 1994 11:23:09 CST
> From:    Louis Pape <PAPEL@COLUMBIA.DSU.EDU>
> Subject: Re: sequencing software for the IBM-PC
>
> If you find some offers of info on free sequencing software for IBM,
> especially a 386, I'd like to know!  There was a free demo of
> something, but not a complete one about a year ago.  Thanks.  LP
 
Several are available via FTP from ftp.cica.indiana.edu and its mirror
sites, for example, music14.zip, "a very easy to use MIDI sequencer" for
windows. Many demos are available there and also through the midilink BBS in
Chicago. CICA is notoriously busy so you might want to do an archie search
for music14.zip and that would lead you to other ftp sites which are less
busy. Also, you can get a working demo disk from most sequencer
manufacturers for $5.
 
Russ Dewey
Psychology Department
Georgia Southern University
rdewey@gasou.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 16:32:58 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Robert Ceely <NEC_CEELY@FLO.ORG>
Subject:      Re: Clash of opposing viewpoints, Part Deux
 
As threy say on the range:: You are right on target.
Keep it up.
Cheers
RPC
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 16:29:05 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Keith C. Perry" <perrykc@DUNX1.OCS.DREXEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: OutOfPhase software
 
>> Do you know of an FTP site for this?
>
>I got it of an infomac mirror. I guess the original infomac site is
>sumex-aim.stanford.edu or something. If all fails, i always go through the
>mirror site at archie.au.
>
>
>--
>Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
>On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             <MST3k>
 
 
I've played around with OutOfPhase before- VERY nice from what I've been
able to  do so far.  A good InfoMac Mirror is ftp.lth.se and I know they
have in in the
 
===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===
 
Keith C. Perry 800-836-4599
                                              /\ "To be or not to be...
Floor Supervisor / Senior Consultant          \/     THAT AIN'T A QUESTION"
Drexel University Office of Computing Services--|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
...
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 16:34:19 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         BIGGERSTAFF THAD LEWIS <thad@FALCON.CC.UKANS.EDU>
Subject:      essentic forms...
In-Reply-To:  <01HHYMSX4O7Q99Z8YZ@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU>
 
Anybody out there know anything about essentic forms?
 
From Music Mind and Brain, chapter 4, The Living Quality of Music:
Neurobiologic Patterns of Communicating Feeling, authors: Manfred Clynes
and Nigel Nettheim-----
 
"Are there dynamic forms that have an innate meaning, forms that can act
upon the nervous system not in arbitrary ways but like keys in a lock,
activating thereby specific brain processes to which we react in some
sense emotionaly?  Are we drwan, in composing and listening, to phrases
that (among other things) evoke such biologically determined forms?  We
have answered these questions affirmatively through experimental studies...
[etc]."
 
This is the guy I was speaking about last week, if any one was listening,
who translated "emotive" muscle movement into "emotive" sounds....
 
Any reactions/flames (hey- I just read the stuff!)/ actual knowledge on
the subject?
 
It seems this is what the Halfler Trio are into, but I have always
wondered whether they were sincere or posing (or both...)
 
Curious-
 
-thad
 
 
On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, jk wrote:
 
> From: Nate Waddoups <natew@HALCYON.COM>
> >I've read a thing or two about sending different low frequencies into
> >each ear - supposedly, the subject's brain waves fall into synch with the
> >difference between the two frequencies, and meditative states can be
> >induced this way.  Interesting idea.
> Indeed, a binaural phenomenon.  There was a Scientific American
> article of many years ago which described binaural excitation.  As
> we all know if you mix two signals (lets say 440Hz and 443Hz) and
> listen, you'll hear tone beating.....e.g. the same beating you hear when
> you're trying to tune a guitar.  Well, that's not so cool....big
> deal!  It becomes of interest when you send a different frequency
> tone into each ear, as Nate describes.  In this case, providing you
> have ideal isolation (like an in-the-ear headset), it is the *brain*
> that 'hears' the beating.  The beating does not occur in the air as it
> would from stereo speakers.  It is a construct based on neural
> stimulation.
>
> Driving brain waves with this beating has been described, but I'm
> not sure if a large sample size trial has been done using quantitative
> EEG or brain mapping.  (John 3: have you heard of such a trial?)
>
> It is relatively easy to program an experimental tone(s) on a synth
> provided you are sure that signal paths of the tones do not cross
> electronically.
>
>                                                       _
> -john       ___                                    __/ |
> ___        |   |     JKrikawa@CCIT.Arizona.Edu    |    |___      ________
>    \______/     \__________ Tucson, AZ ___../\./\/         \____/        \____
>
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 17:15:17 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jeff Wheeler <jwheeler@BIGCAT.MISSOURI.EDU>
Subject:      Csound List still active?
 
Hi all,
First, I want to thank all of you who helped me get ahold of CSound. I
have downloaded the program as well as the manual. I also decided to
subscribe to the CSound List. I have sent two requests to
"pcsound-request@maths.bath.ac.uk" and have recieved no response, but
have also recieved no "undeliverable mail". Anyone know if the list is
still active?
 
Another question if anyone can help: I downloaded CSound not really
knowing what the system requirements are for the program. Here is my
system: 486/33, 8mg of RAM, 420mg HD, and a Roland RAP-10 sound card. Is
this enough for Csound, or am I getting in over my head on this one?
 
Thanks in advance, Jeff
 
       ______________________________________________________________
      | Jeffrey K. Wheeler                       |  The Secret to    |
      | jwheeler@bigcat missouri.edu             |  the Universe     |
      |                                          |  is @*&%##...     |
      | 3600 E. Hidden Lane                      |                   |
      | Hartsburg, Missouri  65039-9774   U.S.A. |  NO CARRIER       |
       --------------------------------------------------------------
          "I only know that through music you can reach to God"
                                                    Ali Akbar Khan
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 21:07:39 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Siberian Khatru <jsouthwo@KELLER.CLARKE.EDU>
Subject:      Score for PC.  Thoughts?
 
        I recently acquired a list of computer "composing" programs
(more-so notation programs) and noticed that Score is on the list (a name
I am vaguely familiar with) for the PC running DOS.  What do any of you
who use it think.  My current situation is that I'm using Music Printer
Plus, but it's just not powerful enough.  It's fine for my more
mainstream "rock"-ish sort of stuff, but (WARNING!Obligatory Schoenberg
reference!) when I try to enter my more avant-garde 12-tone material, it
just can't hack it.  So I guess I'm asking how "powerful" is Score--will
it fill my needs?  Or should I wait for some truly killer Windows based
program.
 
Cheers,
 
Jon Southwood
jsouthwo@keller.clarke.edu
 
******************************************************************************
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem.  They're there every night, they
see it done every night, the see how it should be done every night, but
they can't do it themselves."-Brendan Behan
******************************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 22:33:23 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Keith C. Perry" <perrykc@DUNX1.OCS.DREXEL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: OutOfPhase software
 
>
>
>I've played around with OutOfPhase before- VERY nice from what I've been
>able to  do so far.  A good InfoMac Mirror is ftp.lth.se and I know they
>have in in the
>
 
 
Ooops, I made a mistake- OutofPhase doesn't seem to be on info-mac set
anymore however if you gopher gopher.merit.edu and choose menu numbers
6,6,11 and then 3- page down once and you will see both the fpu and non-fpu
version of the software.  Unfortunately, I don't have the ftp equivalent
address (didn't have time to page through the menus) :).
 
 
Sorry about the bad and incorrect info...
 
 
===+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+===
 
Keith C. Perry 800-836-4599
                                              /\ "To be or not to be...
Floor Supervisor / Senior Consultant          \/     THAT AIN'T A QUESTION"
Drexel University Office of Computing Services--|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
...
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 23:32:38 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Burton Beerman <BBEERMA@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      score
 
  >I recently acquired a list of computer "composing" programs
>(more-so notation programs) and noticed that Score is on the list (a name
>I am vaguely familiar with) for the PC running DOS.  What do any of you
>who use it think.  My current situation is that I'm using Music Printer
>Plus, but it's just not powerful enough.  It's fine for my more
>mainstream "rock"-ish sort of stuff, but (WARNING!Obligatory Schoenberg
>reference!) when I try to enter my more avant-garde 12-tone material, it
>just can't hack it.  So I guess I'm asking how "powerful" is Score--will
>it fill my needs?  Or should I wait for some truly killer Windows based
>program.
 
 
 
>Cheers,
 
>Jon Southwood
>jsouthwo@keller.clarke.edu
 
There is been a recent discussion of Score vs finale vs nightingale on the
finale listserv.
I use Score 70 % of the time because it is transparent to my ideas and allows
me to do things quickly that I used to do with pen and ink.  It is not really
MIDI interactive or page oriented like finale (MIDI speedy note entry is
possible and third party software allows complex MIDI in and out).  It has a
very steep learning curve but does remain as the publishing industry standard.
It is also very expensive (about $1100 with the third party software).
I have used it on a 286 and 386 but really needs a math co-processor for these
formats.  I now use it on a dx266 and it does fine.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 12 Oct 1994 18:54:36 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stefan Scheffler <stefan@MMS-GMBH.DE>
Subject:      Re: Ears and beers (was: Sex and Academia?)
 
>On Wed, 12 Oct 1994, Jim Gardner wrote:
>
>> > What human
>> >ears do is very much like Fourier analysis.
>>
> ....
>The following is from Donald E. Hall, _Musical Acoustics_; Wadsworth
>Publishing, 1980:
>
>"Different frequencies preferentially produce motion of different parts of
>the basilar membrane, so that different fibers of the auditory nerve
>receive the greatest stimulation."
>
>In other words, the different fibers of the auditory nerve correspond to
>the different frequency bins in Fourier analysis, and the amount of
>stimulation of these nerves corresponds to the amplitude stored in the
>frequency bins.
>
Nowadays it is called wavelet analysis. It does not depend on pure sine
waves. Especially it is more easy suited for logarithmic frequency
perception. Since its frequency bands are logarithmic spaced, and therefore
cover more frequencies or harmonics.
 
Maybe I am wrong, but as far as I digged into the Wavelet Analysis it looks
more natural than the mathematical fourier stuff.
 
Ciao,
  Stefan
 
PS: This is a try to get another hip word spread through the world.
 
<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 12:47:17 --100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jesper Alsed <jesper@KPN.DATA.SODRA.SE>
Subject:      perfect pitch-hearing
 
Hello!
 
I have read an advertisment in Keyboard Magazine some months ago about a
technic to learn to recognice sound-frequencies (perfect pitch-hearing).
The advertisment says almost everyone could learn this with some practice
with help of their training-program. You should even be able to recognise
chords, they say.  This could be interesting. Maybe it doesn't make a big
difference when you're composing, but when performing/jamming it certainly does.
Is this really possible? Is it a widely known technic or a well kept secret?
Has anyone out there tried it? I'm a little bit skeptic so I need some positive
 response before I spend any $
on the training-program.
 
 
/       Jesper Alsed
        jesper@data.sodra.se
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 09:04:53 LCL
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Michael Carnes <mc@LEXICON.COM>
Subject:      Re: Score for PC.  Thoughts?
In-Reply-To:  <9410130211.AA11645@ursa-major.spdcc.com>
 
----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: text
X-Sun-Data-Description: text
X-Sun-Data-Name: text
X-Sun-Content-Lines: 4
X-Sun-Content-Length: 333
 
Score has been around for 15-20 years.  Originally written by Leland
Smith on a mainframe.  There was a review in Electronic Musician two
or three years ago.  I seem to remember a number of positive things
being said.  At the same time, the low level of advertising and buzz
might be indicative of a low level of support.  Good luck.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 09:12:11 LCL
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Michael Carnes <mc@LEXICON.COM>
Subject:      Re: perfect pitch-hearing
In-Reply-To:  <9410131150.AA27204@ursa-major.spdcc.com>
 
----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: text
X-Sun-Data-Description: text
X-Sun-Data-Name: text
X-Sun-Content-Lines: 5
X-Sun-Content-Length: 366
 
I saw a review of the perfect pitch program a couple of years ago.
The gist of the review was that it was hokum.  As far as recognizing
chords and stuff, what you need to develop is a sense of relative
pitch.  All you need for that is time and dedication.  Just listen to
music you like and figure out how to play it by ear.  All of the necessary
skills will follow.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 10:38:09 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Charles Shriner <ccps@PHANTOM.COM>
Subject:      General MIDI Chart
 
I'm trying to locate an FTP site with a General MIDI Chart.
Any suggestions?
Thanks in advance
ccps
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 12:04:08 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Phil Skiba <SPS5251%SIENA.BITNET@VM.ITS.RPI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: perfect pitch-hearing
 
In my experience, good relative pitch is much more useful than perfect
pitch.  I used to play with a keyboardist who could recognize any note,
and any chord, but who had a hard time "relating" to the music, whereas
I have also played with guitarists with good relative pitch who can get
along fine, because relative pitch is just as good as perfect pitch, if
you know what key you are in.  I think intervallic hearing is just as
good as recognizing any discrete frequency.
 
phil
sps5251@siena.bitnet
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 11:55:59 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         James Porter <porterj@LBM.COM>
Subject:      Re: perfect pitch-hearing
 
>Hello!
>
>I have read an advertisment in Keyboard Magazine some months ago about a
>technic to learn to recognice sound-frequencies (perfect pitch-hearing).
>The advertisment says almost everyone could learn this with some practice
>with help of their training-program. You should even be able to recognise
>chords, they say.  This could be interesting. Maybe it doesn't make a big
>difference when you're composing, but when performing/jamming it certainly
does.
>Is this really possible? Is it a widely known technic or a well kept secret?
>Has anyone out there tried it? I'm a little bit skeptic so I need some positive
> response before I spend any $
>on the training-program.
>
>
>/       Jesper Alsed
>        jesper@data.sodra.se
>
I don't claim to have perfect pitch, but I studied under a professor who does.
He dismisses the training as a joke, saying that people are born with it.
Just a point of view.
*******************
James Porter
Lawton, Oklahoma
porterj@lbm.com
*******************
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 14:20:08 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Burton Beerman <BBEERMA@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      score and pc
 
<Score has been around for 15-20 years.  Originally written by Leland
<Smith on a mainframe.  There was a review in Electronic Musician two
<or three years ago.  I seem to remember a number of positive things
<being said.  At the same time, the low level of advertising and buzz
<might be indicative of a low level of support.
 
L. Smith's company is very small, I have gotten him on the phone with questions
about score on several occasions and he has ALWAYS been helpful and patient.
It is a program that assumes a high learning curve but the only program that is
transparent to my own ideas and doesn't dictate how the music is to be
notated.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 17:47:28 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Janice Saffir <FA19%NEMOMUS.bitnet@ACADEMIC.NEMOSTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Score for PC. Thoughts?
In-Reply-To:  In reply to your message of WED 12 OCT 1994 10:07:39 CST
 
>Jon Southwood
  asked about the notation program "Score" for PC.  I am
about this too.  I have heard that it is the only notation
program from which big publishers such as Peters will accept
the output.  I am guessing that it has to be better than
Finale, but I would like to know about it too.
                  Janice Saffir
                  FA19%nemomus.bitnet@academic.nemostate.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 20:26:20 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         BIGGERSTAFF THAD LEWIS <thad@FALCON.CC.UKANS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Ears and beers (was: Sex and Academia?)
In-Reply-To:  <01HI7NDJF87M9EFA7S@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU>
 
On Wed, 12 Oct 1994, Stefan Scheffler wrote:
> >
> >"Different frequencies preferentially produce motion of different parts of
> >the basilar membrane, so that different fibers of the auditory nerve
> >receive the greatest stimulation."
> >
> >In other words, the different fibers of the auditory nerve correspond to
> >the different frequency bins in Fourier analysis, and the amount of
> >stimulation of these nerves corresponds to the amplitude stored in the
> >frequency bins.
> >
> Nowadays it is called wavelet analysis. It does not depend on pure sine
> waves. Especially it is more easy suited for logarithmic frequency
> perception. Since its frequency bands are logarithmic spaced, and therefore
> cover more frequencies or harmonics.
>
> Maybe I am wrong, but as far as I digged into the Wavelet Analysis it looks
> more natural than the mathematical fourier stuff.
 
 
So where can one learn a little (or alot) more about this "Wavelet
Analysis" theory?  I took a Psychology of Perception class last semester,
and this was barely alluded to...Are there any Universities working on
research in this area right now?
 
intrigued-
 
-thad
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 13 Oct 1994 21:42:22 -0600
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         JOSHUA BOELTER <BOELTERJ@UWPLATT.EDU>
 
        This is probably a little off base but here goes.
I am currently a freshman at University Wisconsin Platteville studying
Electrical Engineering.  I have been following the discussion of computers and
would appreciate any info on the following.  I plan to buy one sometime within
the year.  I hope to use it for both engineering and music.  I prefer to use
macs because of the ease of use. Any input is appreciated
        Also, I would like any input from anyone with a EE or similiar degree.
Kind of just anything in general.  Please e-mail me directly
 
Joshua Boelter
IN%"boelterj@uwplatt.edu"
 
Thanks
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 14 Oct 1994 13:02:06 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: Ferneyhough Infough
 
Hi Jim, ever seen a Fernyhough score?
The guy's a... well, in this polite discourse, I won't say exactly what,
but you get my drift!
Regards, David.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 14 Oct 1994 13:10:05 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: essentic forms...
 
Hello John,
Manfred Clynes wrote a number of books on his so-called 'sentics'.  He built
machines to measure musicians' pulse-playing (force vs. time or something like
that).  As far as I'm aware,no one has been able to replicate his results and
he has passed into history as a rather unreliable chap.
 
Try reading "Sentics" (sorry, no reference in front of me).  He makes all these
outlandish claims and expects the reader to accept them, and uses pseudo-
scientific experiments to back up his cliams.  Very dodgy stuff indeed.
 
Regards, David.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 14 Oct 1994 12:45:25 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jim Gardner <jim@KIOSK.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:      I like music
 
David Rodger wrote:
>Hi Jim, ever seen a Ferneyhough score?
 
Yes -  many.
 
Have you *heard* any Ferneyhough?
 
BTW Is Jeff Pressing still at LaTrobe? I enjoyed his writings on improvisation.
 
Jim
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 14 Oct 1994 09:54:00 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Peter Mueller <Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re[2]: Ferneyhough Infough
 
Hi Jim, ever seen a Fernyhough score?
The guy's a... well, in this polite discourse, I won't say exactly what,
but you get my drift!
Regards, David.
 
 
Yo David: while I agree that his stuff his VERY hard to play, it is dramatic and
great to listen to. Ok, I'm biased - he was my teacher.
-Peter
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 14 Oct 1994 18:59:17 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Ron Jones <DJDreams@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: I like music
 
Hay guys what the heck is ferneyhough?
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 14 Oct 1994 17:52:00 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Peter Mueller <Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re[2]: I like music
 
Hay guys what the heck is ferneyhough?
 
     A Welsh composer who is considered to be the central figure of the
     "new complexity". He is currently living and teaching in San Diego.
     Check him, he's great.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Sep 1994 09:42:58 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Phil Skiba <SPS5251%SIENA.BITNET@VM.ITS.RPI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: MPEG sound player for Windows?
 
You can ftp them from the internet underground music archive.  I
forget the directory, but the site is something like sunsite.unc.edu maybe?
I'll look it up...I thought I had it around here someplace....
 
Phil
sps5251@siena.bitnet
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Sep 1994 14:38:28 GT+3
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Hermann Henning Rauth <RLAT1@RLA01.PUCPR.BR>
Organization: PUC/PR
 
> Here is a simple question that I thought I might be able to find on a FAQ
> but have been unable to.  I have 1) a pc-clone 2) a korg dss-1 and 3) a
> roland mpu-401 and 4) voyetra sequencer plus software.  With these I can
> record and compose and play back on the korg.  As a beginner on the
> internet, I am missing something simple.  If I download a midi file, what
> do I do with it?  My software saves .sng files--I assume specific to the
> voyetra software.  Do I need some other kind of card or equipment to play
> or edit these files?
>
> Jeff Apfel
>
 
Well, if you get the .mid files you should go to the files screen on
your Sequencer+ (press F on the main screen) and then change the file
type (pressing M, for mode). I believe there are 4 or 5 types of files
that Sequencer+ works with: .sng .rol .mid .s and some other I don't
remember. After that, select the directory where your .mid files are
and press L to load one of them.
Hope that helps...
 
Hermann Rauth
rlat1@rla01.pucpr.br
LIFO - industrial band
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Sep 1994 10:51:59 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Lessons from the crypt
 
>
> The Schoenbergian delemia is that his works are tremendous monoliths of the
 
Delemia? Sounds contagious. The word has a nice ring to it though.
>
> Now while this might sound like Sartreian smokeblowing, Stravinsky would
> blink and scowl saying "Music is incapable of communicating anything at all !
> ".
> perhaps that is why so few of his scores are regularly performed.
 
You don't go to very many concerts do you? Granted that Firebird,
Petrushka and Rite of Spring still count for the bulk of Stravinsky
performances, many of the Neoclassical scores are coming into their own.
L'Histoire du Soldat and the Octet are favorites with large chamber
groups, Pulcinella is a staple of the chamber orchestra repertory. The
Rakes Progress is turning up in major opera houses, the Symphony of
Psalms is gaining status as the Great Twentieth Century Choral Work.
Few musicians pay much heed to his "music cannot express anything at all"
statement, because Stravinsky's own works give the lie to it.
>
> I have come to these conclusions -
>
> #1. Rhythmic and temporal relationships are more structurally important than
> harmonic relationships. (The Schoenbergian school is a treasure trove of
> rhythmic possibilities)
>
> #2. Melodic constucts are best understood by the listner when they are
> modeled on the rhythmic and tonal inflections of the human voice. (see #1)
>
> #3 Overly self referential works are ultimately doomed to a response of
> indifference from the listner (angst ridden tragi-posing wears out the
> audience quickly and only works for pop formulas which have a fresh cycle of
> self obsessed post adolescents every five years who spend vast sums of money
> to be told how tragic their lot in the world is)
 
I think these could all be plausibly argued. I wouldn't mind hearing you
expand on each of these points, although there may be some who might
resent the consumption of so much emusic-less bandwitdth.
 
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Sep 1994 10:42:24 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Damien James Miller <943127@EDNA.CC.SWIN.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Realtime Csound?
 
Hi!
 
Has anyone succeded in getting realtime audio out of (PC version) Csound?
If so, could you explain how?
 
as an extension to this, is it possible for Csound to read from a stream
of MIDI data, and spit out realtime audio?
 
Thanks,
Damien
 
**************************************************************************
|   Damien Miller  aka  toado@edna.cc.swin.edu.au  aka  Silicon Dreams   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|     what would _you_ do with a pet sloth?      |      what problem?    |
**************************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Sep 1994 15:48:32 MEZ
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Thomas Neuhaus <FFH002@VM.HRZ.UNI-ESSEN.DE>
Subject:      A/UX and MIDI Programs
 
Hello all,
 
has anybody ever tried to make MIDI-Programs work under the Finder environment
of A/UX, that means "Standard" Macintosh Applications which use MIDI?
If so: How did you manage it? If i try even to launch e.g. Patchbay, it tells
these nice little thing about an unknown program quitting unexpectedly
with an error of type one. (Very informative as always under MacOS).
I didn't find a clue in any of he manuals, checked the device files
(crw-rw-rw-   1 bin      bin        0,  0 Sep 30 21:59 /dev/modem)
and the MIDI-Interface reacts when I write something to that
device. Any clues?
 
I suspect that Finale bombs away for a similar reason  but maybe one
of you was able to get it running and knows a trick that hasn't got
anything to do with midi. Please let me know.
 
And don't blame me for the setup. We need A/UX and Finale at the same
time and on the same machines sharing the same environment (Network etc.)
for good reasons. Believe me, If I could,  I would make things quite different-
ly, but I just can 't.
 
Thanks for your help (if any)
 
Thomas
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Sep 1994 16:12:27 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Robin Davies <BLPS@MUSICB.MCGILL.CA>
Subject:      please sign me off
In-Reply-To:  In reply to your message of MON 26 SEP 1994 09:34:10 EDT
 
sign off
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Sep 1994 19:13:07 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Current computers for composition
 
>Well, my "religious" beliefs are less a "pro Mac" then a "die Windows die"
>religions.
 
Strangely, my belief system tells me that EMUSIC is a list for talking
about electronic music.
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Sep 1994 14:38:13 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stephen David Beck <sbeck@MARAIS.MATH.LSU.EDU>
Subject:      E-music Opportunity
 
I don't know whether this goes against the ban on advertising
on this list, but the Society for Electro-Acoustic Music in the
United States (SEAMUS) has extended its deadline for the 1995
National Conference to October 15, 1994.  It's a great organization
and a good opportunity to have your music heard.
 
If you would like a copy of the Call for Scores, please e-mail
me and I'll forward it to you.  You do not have to be a member to
apply.  BTW, the conference will be at Ithaca College, in Ithaca
NY, March 23-25, 1995.
 
Stephen David Beck
President-Elect, SEAMUS
sbeck@math.lsu.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Sep 1994 13:17:24 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Denis Trcek <denis.trcek@IJS.SI>
Subject:      VESTAX and MUSIC DEALERS
 
could someone from the states please provide me with the adresses/faxes
of VESTAX Company (recording equipment producer) and of some big
resellers in the US that sell music/recording equipment.
 
Please respond directly to me and thanks in advance.
 
 
==================
 
************************************************************* ************
* Denis Trcek                                       O O      * *         *
* "Jozef Stefan" Institute                        O O         * *        *
* Jamova 39, 61 111 Ljubljana, SLOVENIA           O   O        * *       *
* e-mail: denis.trcek@e5.ijs.si denis.trcek@ijs.si  O           * *      *
* Tel.:+386 61 1259 199, Fax:+386 61 1261 029, +386 61 273 677   * *     *
******************************************************************* ******
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 30 Sep 1994 00:20:25 GMT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stuart Anderson <stuart@ITSU-LRC.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: MAX for $120
 
>>BTW Someone has offered me MAX for 120 (yes it's legit). Do you thinks it's a
>>good deal or should I go for a kosher version so I can get upgrades ? How
> stable
>>is the current version ? I'd only be running on a 475... Thanks
>
>Stuart,
>
>  If it's legit, I don't see why there would be problems geting upgrades. The
> program is copy protected and has a serial number so it's not hard to verify
> but you better check with Opcode to be sure. (415) 856-3331 The current
>version
> is 2.5.2 and I used it on a IIcx without problems. It's reasonably stable for
>a
> development environment. You can do things to make it unstable. I did.
>
>  Speed depends upon your work. There are two areas of concern. As your patches
> get larger, it may take some time to load parts into memory and redraw the
> screen. This is primarily a problem when creating patches. I once did a
>"Select
> All" in a twelve-tone set-matrix and waited twenty minutes for the selection.
> It took a second to alter the selection and another twenty minutes to
>deselect.
> Max is a fast program but If you employ heavy real-time calculations you could
> cause MAX or anything else to gag.
>
>Pat
 
OK, I'll give it some thought... the price is 120 pounds (quid, sterling etc)
not dollars so it's not that good a deal !!
 
I think I'd like to do some realtime stuff with an Octapad as a controller using
Max to send note sequences from a single pad hit, also dependant on velocity. I
dare say it can do lots more but this would do for starters...
 
I have done something myself in C for Midi Manager but my programming isn't up
to the really complex stuff... never mind.
 
Thanks
Stuart
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Sep 1994 11:26:02 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Steve Hills <SHILLS@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: ALESIS 8track ADAT
 
        Thanks for the information! (KSUVM.KSU.EDU).
 
SHills@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 1 Oct 1994 09:39:04 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Piet van Oostrum <piet@CS.RUU.NL>
Subject:      Midi files/software archives on the Internet
 
There is a list of ftp and mail server archives with MIDI documentation,
programs and music on the Internet. Also enclosed is a list of MIDI and
electronic music related mailing lists.
 
The latest version of this file can be obtained by ftp from ftp.cs.ruu.nl
[131.211.80.17] in pub/MIDI/DOC/archives or by mail from
mail-server@cs.ruu.nl (send a message with HELP in the body). From the
mail-server the filename without pub/ should be used.
The latest monthly version is also available in the various news.answers
archives around the world, in music/midi/archives.
 
Version: $Id: archives,v 1.92 1994/09/30 16:44:22 piet Exp $
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 1 Oct 1994 09:39:04 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Piet van Oostrum <piet@CS.RUU.NL>
Subject:      Computer Music bibliography
 
There is a bibliography on synthesizers, midi, computer and electronic
music that I have collected from various sources. I have tried to bring
some structure into it, but not all books will fit into a single subject.
NOTE: I haven't read these books, and the comments are from other people.
 
The latest version of this file can be obtained by ftp from ftp.cs.ruu.nl
[131.211.80.17] in pub/MIDI/DOC/bibliography or by mail from
mail-server@cs.ruu.nl (send a message with HELP in the body). From the
mail-server the filename without pub/ should be used.
The latest monthly version is also available in the various news.answers
archives around the world, in music/midi/bibliography.
 
Version: $Id: bibliography,v 1.25 1994/09/08 12:24:00 piet Exp $
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 1 Oct 1994 19:38:26 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Tom Jordan <Wired4Soun@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Books on songwriting
 
Re:  Mix Bookshelf here's their 24-hour fax number 510-653-5142. Fax them
your snail mail address with a request for a catalog. That will be a great
place to start.
 
-Tom Jordan
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 2 Oct 1994 18:12:24 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Giovanni Ramello - Doc.rif A.Antoniotto Dip SAAST"
              <ramello@RS950.CISI.UNITO.IT>
Subject:      Csound for Atari
In-Reply-To:  <9409281428.AA22696@rs950.cisi.unito.it>
 
Does anyone know a ftp site to grab Csound for Atari ST ?
 
 
Giovanni Ramello
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 2 Oct 1994 19:56:18 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Phil Skiba <SPS5251@SIENA.BITNET>
Subject:      chords
 
hey everybody.  I am currently stuck between a rock and a hard place....could
someone help me out?  I need help deciphering the following chords, i.e. what
the notes are.
 
Abo9  (That "o" should be "in the air")
Ab+7
Gbm6
 
basically, all I need to know is what do the "o" and "+" do to the chords.
I'm pretty sure one is "augmented", buti don't know what the other means
 
thnaks
 
Phil
sps5251@siena.bitnet
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 00:42:02 EST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Thomas DiGiovanni <DT62%LAFAYACS.bitnet@LAFIBM.LAFAYETTE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: chords
In-Reply-To:  In reply to your message of SUN 02 OCT 1994 09:56:18 EST
 
I hope this will help you out:
Abo9 : Ab B D F    (the 'o' means diminished - minor thirds between each
                    note)
Ab+7 : Ab C E Gb   (the '+' is augmented - raise the fifth a half step)
Gbm6 : Gb A Db Eb  (A confusing chord because the Eb is not in the
                    natural minor scale)
-Tom DG
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 2 Oct 1994 23:50:23 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         keeshan chris <zzkeesha@ACC.WUACC.EDU>
Subject:      sequencing software
 
hi  :> I am looking for some good freeware/shareware that i could download that
is pretty high level, and the ability to save what you have wriiten ..
any ideas?
thanks in advance!
zzkeesha@acc.wuacc.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 10:55:28 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Lessons from the crypt
 
>> #1. Rhythmic and temporal relationships are more structurally important than
>> harmonic relationships. (The Schoenbergian school is a treasure trove of
>> rhythmic possibilities)
>>
>> #2. Melodic constucts are best understood by the listner when they are
>> modeled on the rhythmic and tonal inflections of the human voice. (see #1)
>>
>> #3 Overly self referential works are ultimately doomed to a response of
>> indifference from the listner (angst ridden tragi-posing wears out the
>> audience quickly and only works for pop formulas which have a fresh cycle of
>> self obsessed post adolescents every five years who spend vast sums of money
>> to be told how tragic their lot in the world is)
>
>I think these could all be plausibly argued. I wouldn't mind hearing you
>expand on each of these points, although there may be some who might
>resent the consumption of so much emusic-less bandwitdth.
>
No, by all means feel free. Everyone can learn structural lessons from the
discussion of such topics.
 
Point 1: Yes, definitely. The ear seems to detect rhythmic patterns, even
complex ones, much more easily that it does harmonic relations. (This is
from my own subjective experience). It is far simpler to "feel" a 22/8
groove than it is to follow a harmonically dense 1-2-3-4 section.
 
Point 2: Depends. Like I've said before, I can hear very distictly in my
mind's ear sections from Babbitt's "Composition for synthesizer". I believe
that interesting timbres can contribute significantly to making unusual
harmonic relationships memorable.
 
Point 3: Again, depends. Many of the jazz standards survive not because
they are such world-shaking philosophical statement but because they're
good tunes. I suppose these *don't* fit into the "overly-self-referential"
model because they stand well on their own. There are good melodists
currently composing (I personally happen to find a lot of the stuff that
Sting does quite nice if I don't listen to the words).
 
 -- Joe M.
 
--
"At the end of the hour, we'll have information on the sedatives used by
the artists,,," (MST3K)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 13:32:22 BST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Steven.Bramson@JET.UK
Subject:      Re: MIDI driver for Windows
 
Tomek Sadowski writes ...
Subject:
 
Hi,
I've got a small software problem: I've built a very simple MIDI
interface based on a slightly modified RS232 card. From the PC point
of view, it is just a COM port (configurable as COM1 thru 4 by
changing addresses and interrupt number). So far, I've found that my
card is compatible with the "Optronics Basic Midi Kit" driver of
CakeWalk 4.0 Standard (DOS), but now I'm looking for a Windows driver
for such a device, or at least some informations on how to write it.
Can anyone help me?
 
....
 
The Yamaha Hello Music module and the Roland Sound Canvas SC55 mrk II both have
serial interfaces and presumably have both DOS and Windows drivers to allow a PC
with a standard COM port to make a MIDI connection.
 
Hope this helps
 
Steven.Bramson@jet.uk
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 11:23:49 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      More on the ADAT (redirected to SYNTH-L)
 
>
>The machines reproduce very nicely and are wonderful for "workhorse" tasks
>that would eat up too much storage space on a random access system
>(pro-tools,sound tools II etc). Idiot proof interface.
>
>My HUGE! beef with alesis is theie proprietory attitude. ie you must by a
>$1000.00 box (from them) in order to digitaly transfer files to a standard
>DAT machine or to ANY other instrument unless of course it's an alesis
>product which has an alesis A/I built into it. This presents major problems
>for those of us who do alot of random access recording/sound
>design/editing. Also if you want to perform any kind of digital editing
>techniques you must by their $1000.00 BRC remote. Also if you want to sync
>to an outside source without having to waste a track for SMPTE or if you
>want to incorporate ANY Other form of synchronization you have to buy
>another $1000.00 box from alesis. Granted, companies which have some vision
>and respect for the artists that pay their bills (JL Cooper, Digidesign)
>have come up with some cost effective solutions to the synchronization
>issue. I'm all for free enterprise but how about free enterprise with a
>conscience!
>Anyway, the ADAT machines are really just analog interfaces and analog
>concept that store the information digitaly. As I said they are very fine
>for long files. I suppose the editing capabilities are pretty good from a
>tape based view but from a digital view point they are inadequate.
>
>All this is of course is IMHO. ;) The ADAT machines do really supply a
>fine, cost effective medium as long as your needs don't exceed the machines
>capabilities and your budget!
>
>charles
>ccps@mindvox.phantom.com
>zygote productions/potential magnetic media
 
--
"At the end of the hour, we'll have information on the sedatives used by
the artists,,," (MST3K)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 11:24:12 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "by way of xrjdm@farside.gsfc.nasa.gov Joe McMahon"
              <V077QQCS@UBVMS.CC.BUFFALO.EDU>
Subject:      query
 
        Howdy! I'm brand new to the list, and I was wondering
if anyone could help me. I'm very interested in electronic
music that explores the human voice, esp. the recorded human
voice. For example, I'm impressed by the CD "Music as a Second
Language" by Paul de Marinis. And I'm also excited by Laetitia
Sonami's work on "Imaginary Landscapes." Can anyone tell me
where to find more music by these composers or suggest other
recorded works in this vein?
        I'd be forever grateful.
                                        Thanks heaps,
        Steve Sposato
        v077qqcs@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 09:33:14 MST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Trent Hare GD.Flagstaff 602556-7245" <thare@SIRIUS.WR.USGS.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Sample clicks
 
I would like to get a copy. thanks
                                        thare
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 19:21:58 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Comments:     <Parser> W: Incorrect or incomplete address field found and
              ignored.
From:         Mary Jane MacHaffie <machaffm@GOLIATH.SUNYOCC.EDU>
Subject:      Student rates for software
 
Does anyone out there know of a source for music students to get special
rates on music software?
Thanks in advance.
 
M J
 
machaffm@goliath.sunyocc.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 14:34:50 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         James Porter <porterj@LBM.COM>
Subject:      Re: Student rates for software
 
>Does anyone out there know of a source for music students to get special
>rates on music software?
>Thanks in advance.
>
>M J
>
>machaffm@goliath.sunyocc.edu
>
>
I used a place in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, a few years ago when I was still
in school, but that may be further that you'd want to drive.  If not, let me
know, and I'll try to scare up the address for you.  I can't think of any
mail-order houses off-hand that provide such discounts.
 
By the way, what is your principal instrument?
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 15:34:00 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Torry Colichio <TorryC@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: please sign me off
 
Please end my subscription
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 17:59:45 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Please, no more guitar stuff!  (was Re: chords)
 
>>>    Please, this discussion of guitar chords is nothing to do with
>>>
>>>"Electronic music \"gearhead\" list" <SYNTH-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
>>>
>>>    Couldn't you find a guitar list somewhere and discuss it there???
>>
>>Two quick points:
>>
>> - Knowing how to read such chord notations is useful to anyone who uses a
>>   "fake book" (melody + chords), and not everyone's gotten to learn that yet.
>>
>But learning to read fake books is also nothing to do with electronic music!
>
>> - I personally am glad to see that we have a number of people who are
>>   willing to jump in and help  - the fact that you see a lot of responses
>>   is, from my point of view, good, as it shows we have a cooperative
>>   readership. That fact that you have to read them all is just one of
>>    those things that goes along with the fact that this is an e-mail list.
>
>But it's just ever so much noise for the vast majority of people on this list,
>most of whom have zero interest in guitar chords or fake books.
>
>Why don't you post your response to the list and see what people think?
>
With Tom's permission, here it is. I still think that increasing people's
technical competence is valuable.
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"At the end of the hour, we'll have information on the sedatives used by
the artists,,," (MST3K)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 18:22:12 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Burton Beerman <BBEERMA@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      sequencing softwareYou didn't state what platform you are using.
              There is a $29 sequencer
 
advertised in elec musician by the band-in-a-box people (I believe) that
includes a notation module (IBM platform).
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 20:43:11 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Keith Hall <khall@S850.MWC.EDU>
Subject:      Current price on SY 22
 
First, which list is it ok to send messages containing for sale items.
Is it synth-l or emusic-l?
 
Second, does anyone know what the going price for a Yamaha SY22 would be.
 
Thanks,
 
 
--
Keith B. Hall                      khall@celtech.com
Cellular Technical Services        khall@s850.mwc.edu
Seattle, WA
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 10:47:55 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      RE[more!]: Lessons from the crypt!
 
>> #1. Rhythmic and temporal relationships are more structurally important than
>> harmonic relationships. (The Schoenbergian school is a treasure trove of
>> rhythmic possibilities)
>>
 
We might have to consult Frances' "The Perception of Music" or some similar
tome for more info on this.  Anecdotal evidence is rarely sufficient.  Any
music psychologists out there?
 
>>> #2. Melodic constucts are best understood by the listner when they are
>>> modeled on the rhythmic and tonal inflections of the human voice.
>
There was an interesting paper presented at Synaesthetica this year (that's
a music and graphics technology conference in Australia) about tuning the
scales in which sounds are played according to the harmonic spectrum of
the sounds.  I suppose the main problem, then, is that we've become
accustomed to the 12-tone equally trempered scale and try to fit everything
into it.  (Soory, folks, I don't have the procedings on me right now, so
I can't give you a reference.)
 
On point 3:  what are overly self-referential works?  Is it more likely that
works are referential with respect to others?  Isn't this why we speak of
style and genre in music (or art for that matter)?  Actually, there are some
'self-referential' works in C20th composers.  I am thinking here of the
Second Viennese School.  Their works often exhibit elaborate motivic
development which could be described as self-referential, yet these works
are not derided for this.  (How many analyses do you come acoross of this
stuff?  forward to the continuing debate.
Regards, David
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 22:29:54 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Phil Skiba <SPS5251%SIENA.BITNET@VM.ITS.RPI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Please, no more guitar stuff!  (was Re: chords)
 
Well, for my part, I really appriciate all the help I recieved.  In the
last few years I have gotten away from studying theory and chord structure.
As a result, not only couldn't I remember how to construct augmented and
diminished chords, I had begun to confuse the + and o with each other.
If I was doing it, I'm sure there are others who are as well.
 
I'm sorry if all this jazz (if you'll excuse the pun) annoyed some list
members, but I agree with joe...the fundementals can be just as, if not
more, valuable as tech stuff.
 
Phil Skiba
sps5251@siena.bitnet
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 3 Oct 1994 23:39:27 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         MR ROBERT POKLENKOWSKI <NYWK35A@PRODIGY.COM>
Subject:      Enthusiast
 
I have been an electronic music enthusiast since my days as a production
assistant at the computer (music) lab in the old RCA building in NY-back in
the days when what now fits in your rack took up an entire room!
 
The reason for my addition to the flow of information, is that I have run
across a tremendously brilliant, and at times humorous, CD recording that
seems to epitomize everything that this list seems to evoke.
 
The CD that I refer to is titled: "WINSTIN: 'Piano Concerto #1' / 'Symphony
#4'" and is a recording (CD) of some of the music by the American composer
Robert Ian Winstin.
 
In this recording, Winstin; who is a young classical composer, actually
replaces 18 'live' human players of the orchestra with 18 computers.
According to the CD liner notes, Winstin then linked the 18 computers to a
central command computer, which triggered the outside 18 computers via a
laser light box with backstop; which he 'tripped' with his baton to
activate a current and real-time time code.
 
The most astounding thing about this recording is that Winstin was able to
use the 18 computers as 'real-time' active musicians in the orchestra; not
just as background or enhancement sequences!
 
This was a very hard CD to find; but well worth the effort!  I am supplying
this information from the CD liner booklet:
 
Artist: Robert Ian Winstin
Title: "WINSTIN: 'Piano Concerto #1' / 'Symphony #4'" (Virtual Orchestra)
label: ERM (Editions de la Rue Margot) USA
Catalogue #: (CCC) ERM6660
Label Phone #: (312) 935-1676 / (312) 725-5055 FAX
 
In case your interested, this CD is listed in the Schwann/Opus Guide.
 
Thanks for your time...
 
Robert Poklenkowski
NYWK35A@prodigy.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 02:07:18 EST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Thomas DiGiovanni <DT62%LAFAYACS.bitnet@LAFIBM.LAFAYETTE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Chords-what's the problem?
In-Reply-To:  In reply to your message of MON 03 OCT 1994 07:59:45 EST
 
Is it so wrong for a fellow musician to ask for some chords, no matter
what list it is on?  I think a lot of people are so caught up in the
electronic side of music (myself included) that we often forget the
basics.  It's an art form, one that computers and other electronics will
never be able to duplicate to the trained ear.
So maybe it wasn't the absolute correct place to ask the question, but
why get all up-tight about it?  Answer the guy's question, and move on.
No big deal.  As I recall, not so long ago, we had some lengthy
discussions about 12-tone music (Re: Shoenberg).  Not particularly
E-Music, but some incredibly interesting stuff.  So let's get on with
life.  Joe - go on with my other response - I sure do hope my one piece
of mail doesn't trouble too many people.
-Tom D.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 09:35:04 +0200
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DRURYJD@ALPHA.UNISA.AC.ZA
Subject:      SCHOENBERG AND MIDI
 
SCHOENBERG AND MIDI
Please allow me to given this discussion a different slant (track?).  From a
technical point of view what Schoenberg did with his 12-tone system was to
reinterpret the physical properties of the existing keyboard.  The 12 keys per
octave were made equal and pitch properties were serialized, with the 11
intervals in the series being the main conceptual compositional material.
Schoenberg could not have been inspired by the Western notational system for
this, because there are more than 12 notes that can be notated in an octave (Eb
and D# are the same on a well-tempered keyboard but not necessarily on string
or other instruments or the human voice, and in notation do not look the same or
named the same).
 
So what he did was to experiment with making music through a reinterpretation of
certain aspects of a keyboard.  (Or am I missing something -- I'm sure someone
will tell me where I'm wrong). In other ways he did not want to change, thus he
strongly felt the composer and not the technical system must control the music,
that traditional structures like sonata form were still good enough,  genres
 like
"string quartets" were still valid, and so on.
 
Now in MIDI we follow the equal 12-tone idea of Schoenberg (and others), though
not the serial technique.  Traditional Western keys do not have twelve equal
tones per octave, but we try to make tonal music with 12 equal MIDI pitch
numbers per octave, which is scarcely logical.  Where one could find inspiration
in Schoenberg is in his reinterpretation of given, existing instruments/tools.
Could we not use the given, existing MIDI system to create a new technical
system for music, instead of simply accepting the tonal conceptions in use in
Western Europe since 1700?
 
Sure, I know electronic music does use other tunings, any and all type of
 melodic
organisations, but most of us are stuck with 12-tone MIDI.  Sure you can tune
modern synthesizers differently (and retune on the fly if you are clever and
 rich
enough), but the synthesizers still send the note messages as 12-tone MIDI, with
all the consequent loss of flexibility.  Why not take advantage of this in new
*musical*, not only technical, ways?
 
Finally, I think it important to remember that most musics of the world, aside
 from
Classical, pop and modern Western folksongs, use non-tempered, non-12-tone
tunings and scales;  few Westerners are exposed *enough* to these systems, or
ever try to sing in them, to appreciate what is possible.  The 12-tone,
well-tempered musical system was helped along by Schoenberg, even though
his music WAS avant-garde and IS now mostly passe and unappreciated.  Are
we still helping it along, and if so, why?
JDD
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Sep 1994 13:19:01 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stefan Scheffler <stefan@MMS-GMBH.DE>
Subject:      Re: Grab bag
 
>today there was a posting of the cubase address in England. When I tried it I
>got an incorrect address prompt. I checked again and am sure I used what was
>posted. Has anyone else had the same result, did I make an error which escaped
>my second look, and could someone post that address again, please.
The List:
cubase-users@mcc.ac.uk
 
Subscription:
cubase-users-request@mcc.ac.uk
 
It might be possible that the subscription address has changed, the list
address is right it's the one I am using all the time.
 
Ciao,
   Stefan
 
<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 29 Sep 1994 13:32:38 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stefan Scheffler <stefan@MMS-GMBH.DE>
Subject:      Re: MIDI driver for Windows
 
>Hi,
>I've got a small software problem: I've built a very simple MIDI
>interface based on a slightly modified RS232 card. From the PC point
>of view, it is just a COM port (configurable as COM1 thru 4 by
>changing addresses and interrupt number). So far, I've found that my
>card is compatible with the "Optronics Basic Midi Kit" driver of
>CakeWalk 4.0 Standard (DOS), but now I'm looking for a Windows driver
>for such a device, or at least some informations on how to write it.
>Can anyone help me?
>
>Tomek
Try the Voyetra serial MME driver, it is bundled even with Roland devices.
Send me a mail if you do not know where to get it. I saw it on CompuServe
in the Roland Library.
 
Ciao,
   Stefan
 
<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 09:58:49 BST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Chris.Dee" <cad@MARI.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: chords
 
+  meane augmented, raise the fifth a semitone
o (in the air) is diminished, flat third, flat five and a sixth
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 08:28:38 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Steve Hills <SHILLS@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU>
Subject:      Electric Guitar Distortion
 
I've used numerous distortions in my time. I've recently tried the DSP2101
 Studio Tube
Boand the Boss SE70. Hefty price tags.
 
What are you all using for the standard guitar sound? I'm thinking about staying
simple and using only a good distortion with the LXP1 Lexicon I've already got.
I owned the Alesis GT once and didn't like it.
 
I need to use it primarily for recording.
 
SHills@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 08:29:48 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Steve Hills <SHILLS@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU>
Subject:      TASCAM DA88
 
Has anyone used the TASCAM DA88? How does it compare to the Alesis ADAT?
 
SHills@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 09:30:48 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: SCHOENBERG AND MIDI
 
>
> So what he did was to experiment with making music through a reinterpretation
 of
> certain aspects of a keyboard.  (Or am I missing something -- I'm sure someone
> will tell me where I'm wrong). In other ways he did not want to change, thus
 he
 
This is basically true, although Schoenberg might not have actually
thought of it that way. His principal instrument was the cello, I believe.
 
> Now in MIDI we follow the equal 12-tone idea of Schoenberg (and others),
 though
> not the serial technique.  Traditional Western keys do not have twelve equal
> tones per octave, but we try to make tonal music with 12 equal MIDI pitch
> numbers per octave, which is scarcely logical.  Where one could find
 inspiration
 
> organisations, but most of us are stuck with 12-tone MIDI.  Sure you can tune
> modern synthesizers differently (and retune on the fly if you are clever and
>  rich
> enough), but the synthesizers still send the note messages as 12-tone MIDI,
 with
> all the consequent loss of flexibility.  Why not take advantage of this in new
> *musical*, not only technical, ways?
 
It's true, you can recreate music in any number of radical and different
ways but it's not going to make any long-term difference until a
significant number of people can be convinced that what you've done is
tremendous and wonderful enough to warrant changing their habits.
Tradition carries a lot of weight. Musicians who have invested a lot of
time mastering music in 12-tone equal temperament are going to have to be
really enthused if they're going to take the trouble to learn other
temperaments.
 
There have been attempts to create alternate keyboards. If you go to your
nearest copy of New Grove and look under "Janko" you'll see a picture of
one alternative keyboard that was designed in 1882 by Paul von Janko. I'm
now quoting from Grove: "Based on the premise that the hand can barely
stretch more than a 9th on the piano, and that all scales are fingered
differently, Janko's new keyboard had two interlocking 'manuals' with
three touch-points for each key lever, so that it appears to have six
tiers of short, narrow keys. These six tiers constitute one keyboard
operating on the same set of strings; odd-numbered tiers produce a
whole-tone scale from C, even-numbered ones a whole-tone scale from C#.
Accidentals are marked with a black stripe. The advantage of this system
is that all major scales are fingered alike, as are all minor, and an
octave span is only 13 cm. instead of the standard 18.5 cm. Huge
arpeggios can be negotiated with barely any arm movement."
 
The Janko keyboard was still designed to be used with 12-tone equal
temperament, but it could have been adapted to microtonal tunings
(although that would have negated some of the advantages it was
originally designed to implement). If you have access to Groves, you
should take a look at this keyboard. It's a truly bizzarre and awesome
thing. It never caught on. No pianists were willing to relearn their
technique, so we're still stuck with the standard piano keyboard, just as
we're stuck with the old QWERTY typewriter keyboard.
 
Revolutions come and go, but truly lasting changes happen very slowly.
But if you're truly devoted to alternate tunings you can do it with the
present technology and the process of translating the note numbers to
12-tone MIDI shouldn't be too much of a hassle. If enough people see the
virtue of your system then they'll go ahead and invent a new MIDI
standard geared to however many notes you want in an octave. (Don't count
on it happening in your lifetime, though).
 
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 00:34:54 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         DAVID O'DONOGHUE <dodon@OZEMAIL.COM.AU>
Subject:      Re: Chords
 
Reply to message text:
 
  From: Thomas DiGiovanni <DT62%LAFAYACS.bitnet@LAFIBM.LAFAYETTE.EDU>
 
>Is it so wrong for a fellow musician to ask for some chords, no matter
>what list it is on?
>why get all up-tight about it?  Answer the guy's question, and move on.
>No big deal.  As I recall, not so long ago, we had some lengthy
>discussions about 12-tone music (Re: Shoenberg).
 
I agree. Frankly, neither the 'chords' stuff OR 'Shoenberg' interest me.
But why throw either of these subjects off the list?
 
David O'Donoghoe
DODON@OZEMAIL.COM.AU
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 16:34:00 +0200
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jose Manuel Adan <lgzadgaj@LG.EHU.ES>
Subject:      JOKE II
 
 A man goes to the Doctor and says:
  - Doctor, I have a stomach ache!
  - The doctor examines him and says: Well, tou have to be operated.
  - Please doctor say to me: After de operation will I be able to play piano
   well?
  - Yes! Of course!
  - Oh, that's good! It's one of my illusions in my life! I have no idea...
 
 
      Jose (a musician of Spain)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 10:29:10 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Synergetics Inc <synergy@INFONAUT.COM>
Subject:      Re: Please, no more guitar stuff! (was Re: chords)
In-Reply-To:  <199410032200.QAA02022@infonaut.com>
 
> I still think that increasing people's
> technical competence is valuable.
>
I agree. I learned something from the discussion on chords. Keep the
theory alive. I didn't realize it was a religious issue that "electronic
musicians" couldn't speak to "accoustic musicians."
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 15:09:23 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Automata: the long-awaited summary
 
Back in August, I think, I promised to post a quick intro to cellular
automata and how they can be used as a sound-generation tool. Since I'm
going to take a couple of different sources and sum them up with little or
no direct attribution, combined with my own opinions, I'll give everybody
my references *first* so they can delete the article and draw their own
conclusions if they so prefer.
 
The primary reference that got me started on all this is one in the CMJ:
Vol 14, No. 4, Winter 1990: "Digital Synthesis of Self-modifying Waveforms
by Means of Cellular Automata" (Jacques Chareyon). Those who are already
familiar with automata may just skip to that article and forget about the
rest of this one.
Note: the article gives a mail address for M. Chareyon, but he did not
answer an inquiry about any available recordings using this technique in
1990.
 
So. Anyone still here? Good.
 
Cellular automata are a mathematical concept first introduced in the late
1940's. Generally speaking, a cellular automaton consists of a grid of
cells. Each cell may take on any of a number of values - binary automata
(cell on or cell off) are the most commonly studied. Each cell has a
neighborhood, defined more simply as other cells which influence its state.
The exact nature of this influence is defined by what are called transition
rules. The cellular automaton starts off with some cells in any of the
allowable states. for each "step" in the automaton's history, the
neighborhood of every cell is checked, and the state of the cell is
updated. All updates occur simultaneously.
 
The transition rule must describe the resulting state of a cell for every
possible configuration of other cells in the neighborhood. For large
numbers of states, the amount of memory required to hold the transition
rule becomes increasingly large, Therefore, some automata use what is known
as a "totalistic" rule. These rules simply sum the values of the cells in
the neighborhood and then assign a result on this basis. The resulting
tables are far smaller.
 
Many readers may already be familiar with John Horton Conway's game of
"Life". This is a two-dimensional binary automaton with a totalistic rule.
This makes for a very small rule set:
 
  i) If fewer than two filled cells (cells with value 1) surround a cell,
     it becomes empty next generation.
 ii) If more than three filled cells surround a cell, it becomes empty
     next generation.
iii) If exactly three cells filled cells surround a cell, it becomes
     filled on the next generation.
 
This corresponds to a totalistic rule set with a total of 8(2-1)+1 or 9
rules (one each for the sum values of 0 (no cells with a value) through 9
(all cells with a value) ).If the transition rule were represented as a
non-totalistic one, the rule set would need 2**8 or 256 entries. There are
many interesting totalistic automata, so giving up detailed description of
every nuance of the transitions to save memory space isn't a big sacrifice.
 
Interesting as two dimensional automata are, they really aren't terribly
useful for music making. There have been some experiments which have
attempted to use a two-dimensional automaton to generate MIDI events -
synthesis at the note level, using :
 
Battista, T. and M. Giri, 1988. "Composizione Tramite Automi Cellulari."
Atti del VII Cooloquio di Informatica Musicale. Rome, Italy: Edizione Arti
Grafiche Ambrosini, pp. 181-182.
 
Edgar, R. and J. Ryan, 1986. "LINA" Exhibition of the 1986 International
Computer Music Conference, San Francisco: Computer Music Association.
 
I have not heard any of the music from these efforts, so I certainly can't
pass any judgement on them. For the purposes of this summary, we'll just
look at one-dimensional automata. These use a linear array of cells, with
the neighborhood generally being one or two cells on either side of each
cell.
(This is the type of automaton dealt with in M. Chareyon's article, which I
will be paraphrasing broadly hereafter).
 
M. Chareyon's automata are wavetables. A digitized signal is stored as a
linear array of numbers in memory. A totalistic rule is used to determine a
lookup value which indexes into an array containing the resulting value;
this is saved into a second array. After the first array is completely
processed, the roles of the two are swapped and the process is repeated.
 
The limiting factor in this process is the number of bits of resolution
being used to generate the sound. For a totalistic rule using a two-cell
neighborhood and 12-bit individual samples, we have 3*(2*12) = 12288
entries in the rule table. At 2 bytes each, this is  24K of storage. If we
go to 16-bit sample resolution, we have 196608 entries at 2 bytes each for
a total of 393216 bytes, or 384K.
 
The key point of M. Charyeon's method is the use of small neighborhoods
with large numbers of cellular states. Since the computation of the new
wavetable is all table lookup, very complex transition rules can be
precomputed and loaded into the tables, allowing the synthesis to
essentially be a fast sum-and-lookup loop to calculate each new wavesample.
From the article, it appears that M. Chareyon was able to produce 2 or 3
voices in realtime on a Mac II with a Digidesign Sound Accelerator board.
It seems that it would probably be possible to use an AV Mac to do it
without the board.
 
This LASy (Linear Automaton Synthesis) method is closely related to the
Karplus-Strong plucked-string algorithm, in that a wavesample is run
through an algorithm which recirculates the samples to "self-modify" the
wave. In fact, a judicious choice of table entries allows one to very
simply simulate the K-S algoritm directly.
 
So what are the sounds like? Some automata produce waveforms which quickly
"ramp-up" to complex spectra and then drop off quickly. Others move to a
steady state and then remain there. Yet others produce never-ending and
unpredictable waveforms, whose harmonic content is constantly changing.
 
Obviously enough, the original wavesample can be obtained mathematically,
or by actual sampling and using LASy as a waveshaper. As M. Chareyon notes,
a quick estimate of the number of possible automata for a 2-neighbor
totalistic rule using a 256-entry wavetable with 12-bit entries is
(2**12)**256 * (2**12)**(3*2**12) or about 10**4500 possible automata. Of
course, many, many of these would not be suitable for music (e.g., the 4096
automata in which all values go to one vlaue in one step, etc.); however,
the number of musically useful automata is still likely to be an immense
number.
 
M. Chareyon provides a number of examples of ways to fill out the rule
tables and a number of hints on creating wave tables - generally speaking,
one can create a function which is used to compute the values to be placed
into the table and then fill it so it can simply be loaded and used by the
basic algorithm. His experience in using LASy is that he manages
approximately 50% of the time to produce sounds with the desired
characteristics, and that about 10% of the remaining time he gets
unexpected but useful results which can be used as starting points for
further exploration.
 
Again, the important point is that the basic automaton uses wavesamples at
full resolution, calculating a new wavesample for each step of the
automaton; the next wavesample can be played while the new one is being
calculated. Because of the large number of states, mathematical tools for
the analysis of automata and the construction of automata with specifically
desired qualities require too much storage and compute time to make them
useful for LASy purposes.
 
Again, much of this article is paraphrased from M. Chareyon's article; I
take no credit for any of the work in this note. I'm just summarizing.
 
The following other articles were referenced by M. Chareyon's article:
 
Burks, A., ed. 1970. Essays on Cellular Automata. Champaign/Urbana, IL:
University of Illinois Press.
 
Chareyon, J. 1988a. "Sound Synthesis and Processing by Means of Linear
Cellular Automata." Proceedings of the 1988 Internation Computer Music
Conference. San Francisco: Computer Music Association.
 
Chareyon, J. 1988b. "Wavetable come Automa Cellulare: una Nuova Tecnica di
Sintesi." Atti del VII Colloquio di Informatica Musicale, Rome, Italy:
Edizioni Arti Grafiche Ambrosini, pp. 174-177.
 
Farmer, D., T. Toffoli, and S. Wolfram, eds. 1984. Cellular Automata.
North-Holland Physics Publishing. [One of the definitive works on cellular
automata - fairly heavy math, not a popular presentation - JM]
 
Gardner, M. 1970. "The Fantastic Combinations of John Conway's New Solitare
Game 'Life'". Scientific American 223(4) 120-123. [A good introduction to
cellular automata, focusing on 'life' in specific. Useful intro if my
1-paragraph summary of automata was confusing :) - JM]
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"At the end of the hour, we'll have information on the sedatives used by
the artists,,," (MST3K)
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 16:02:33 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Keith Bowers <KaBowers@AOL.COM>
Subject:      deep structure in obscura
 
On OCT 3 David wrote while notating bird songs-
 
>what are overly self-referential works?  Is it more likely that
>works are referential with respect to others?  Isn't this why we speak of
>style and genre in music (or art for that matter)?  Actually, there are some
>'self-referential' works in C20th composers.  I am thinking here of the
>Second Viennese School.  Their works often exhibit elaborate motivic
>development which could be described as self-referential, yet these works
>are not derided for this.
 
I was being intentionaly obscure here. While refering to pop music in
general, my statement really was in regards to works self referential to the
degree that their emotional/deep structure content is rarified to the point
of faliure in establishing communication with listners.
 
 I remember well Michael Gielen being chased from his music directors post in
Cincinnati during the 80's for programing what was, in the orchestra's view,
too many 2nd V. school works. This was actually a revolt on the part of
professional orchestra musicians who would presumably have an advanced
understanding of musical syntax. If Schoenberg and his followers works were
so self referntial that even professional musicians could not or would not be
able to make the links that make a work transcend being a historical
curiosity what is to be expected from the general concert going public?
 
It is In this way I speak of Schoenberg's faliure. HIs solution to the
problems of construting works resulted in either the loss of deep structures
that are intrinsic to musical communication or so revolutonary that the
general listener needs another 100 years to catch up.
 
Joe's post about jazz standards is a point well taken. These works continue
to be viable because the deep structures are approachable by a wide listening
public.
 
Admitably I am wading out into deep water here, but in this transitional
period of music being made by human/computer systems the evolution of musical
deep structures is in tremendous state of revision.
 
As far as references for my statements about temporal relations being more
structuraly important than pitch relations, I recall a "tome" published in
the late 70s or early 80s that related Chomsky's generative theories to
musical comprehension. (THis is what I mean by deep structures above) Im
checking my library to pass along the author and title. anyone recall that
publication?
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 16:23:00 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         HeavyM@AOL.COM
Subject:      Electronic MUsic FTP site.
 
The CyberDen - Worldwide Alternative Music & Entertainment Network
415-472-5527 - Labels, Zines, Multimedia, Bands, Artists, Cultures
cyberden.com - Telnet and anonymous FTP -> Info: info@cyberden.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 16:56:42 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Leo T. Nutley" <Schmeggi@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: SCHOEN AND MIDIBERG
 
Listening to:
Mlton Babbitt: piano works, Robert Taub piano.
Iannis Xenakis: Phlegra, Jalons, Keren, Nomos Alpha, Thallein.
 
Babbitt is a fine example of twelve tone, and having his ideas expressed on
piano i think gives a good feel for the 'tonality' of this type of
composition.
 
Xenakis is another story, to be honest i don't know how much attention he
pays to tonality, other than it is neither traditional nor twelve tone.
 
A while ago someone asked if Morton Subotnick was still composing, i beleave
he still is, although the last work of his i purchased (The Key To Songs;
Return) was published in 1986.  He has co/authored a book which on first
glance seems to be tied in with somantics (or semiotics) and music.  Fred
Frith's "The Technology Of Tears" seems to be akin to Subotnick's style.
 
Enough "old school" discography, there ya go.
 
I haven't actually tried microtonal composition.  Maybe i should start with
quarter tones (i hope this is right) which could lead to a total of 24
possible notes.  It wouldn't be that hard to dedicate two midi channels to a
single timbre, having one ch detuned for the 1/4 step.  (my synth set up
doesn't allow for compression of the octave).
 
Do i need to exhume Harry Partch? And what about the Aphex twin.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 18:49:36 EST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Thomas DiGiovanni <DT62%LAFAYACS.bitnet@LAFIBM.LAFAYETTE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Cakewalk and wave files
In-Reply-To:  In reply to your message of TUE 04 OCT 1994 09:34:54 EST
 
I've been working with a wave station (I'm not sure which one - I think
it's the one that comes with the SoundBlaster package) and would like to
import waves into Cakewalk Pro.(3.0) I have been able to get as far as
importing a wave as a solo voice, but it won't play with voices from my
other MIDI source. (A Yamaha 110, I think) Any suggestions, no matter
how elemtary they are, are welcome.  Thanks in advance...
-Tom D.
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 18:04:46 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Macalester College Music Department <FORNER@MACALSTR.EDU>
Subject:      Re: SCHOEN AND MIDIBERG
In-Reply-To:  Your message dated "Tue,
              04 Oct 1994 16:56:42 -0400 (EDT)"
              <01HHVXCHSX3YAFVQWB@macalstr.edu>
 
"Mr. Nutley et al"
 
re subotnick and is he composing still...
 
Ohhhh yes. Check out "All My Hummingbirds Have Alibis", a work for CD ROM which
came out in 1992. On the same release is "5 Scenes from an Imaginary Ballet".
The CD ROM environment is only slowly being explored as a composers venue,
rather that just a way to "record" music. Imagine a piece which could go in
several different directions, at the control of the listener, much like the
"Create your own Novel" stories teens read. The listener could preprogram the
various available choices before letting the piece play, or, respond to prompts
during the performance such as "for more energy select trac 3, for more quiet
select trac 4" or whatever.
 
With the price of hardware needed to write to CD ROM coming down, it is not
impossible to be able to afford the equipment now. Something on the order of
1,000's instead of 10's of 1,000's. The "Hummingbirds" CD contains much
information about Mort's use of current technology in his recent pieces too as
well as the concept behind the programming...some very minimal interactive
stuff included, but not directly concerning the composition, rather just
accessing various information options.
 
 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ Ed Forner                         Macalester College Music Department +
+ in%"forner@macalstr.edu"          voice (612) 696-6189                +
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 18:22:24 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Macalester College Music Department <FORNER@MACALSTR.EDU>
Subject:      Re: SCHOEN AND MIDIBERG
In-Reply-To:  Your message dated "Tue,
              04 Oct 1994 16:56:42 -0400 (EDT)"
              <01HHVXCHSX3YAFVQWB@macalstr.edu>
 
To Leo T Nutley...sorry I forgot to ask this on my other posting...you mention
a book by Subotnick...title please?? I would like to see it.
 
Thanks
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ Ed Forner                         Macalester College Music Department +
+ in%"forner@macalstr.edu"          voice (612) 696-6189                +
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 16:27:18 PDT
Reply-To:     Ron Lunde <ronl@coolsoft.com>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Ron Lunde <ronl@COOLSOFT.COM>
Subject:      Funny sounds?  Pleasant sounds?
 
I know this is slightly tangential to "music", but can anyone give me
some pointers to any research done on "tones", such as those used by
telephones, computer beeps, trucks backing up, office paging systems,
and so on?  In particular, I'm looking for criteria to use for evaluating
the sound effects we develop (obviously, asking a bunch of people if a
sound is "funny", or "pleasant", or "urgent" is probably the easiest and
best approach to check them, once produced, but there are an infinite number
of possibilities...it'd be handy to be looking in the right place to begin
with...  (Most of our effort right now is going towards "funny" sounds.)
 
If you'd like to hear what we've got so far (and if you want some free,
commercial-quality, very silly, Windows software, in general), send any
email to "sound@coolsoft.com".  It'll send back an automatic response telling
you how to get our free software and initial sound effects.  (This is free,
not shareware.  We're not selling anything, by this.)
 
But if you can tell me how to synthesize funny sounds, or if you have ideas,
I'd sure love to hear them!
 
Thanks,
 
  -- Ron Lunde
     ronl@coolsoft.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 15:25:49 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "william.b.fox" <wbf@ALOFT.ATT.COM>
Subject:      Re: chords
 
> Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 09:58:49 BST
> From: att!AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU!owner-emusic-l
> Subject:      Re: chords
>
> +  meane augmented, raise the fifth a semitone
> o (in the air) is diminished, flat third, flat five and a sixth
 
When I took music theory in college, o was used to indicate a diminished
triad.
                      o
        Example 1a: Ab   --> Ab Cbb Ebb
 
                      o
        Example 2a: G#   --> G# B D
 
A half diminished seventh chord is indicated by o7 which puts the major
seventh on top of the triad.
 
                      o
        Example 1b: Ab 7 --> Ab Cbb Ebb G
 
                      o
        Example 2b: G# 7 --> G# B D F#
 
A fully diminished seventh chord is indicated by d7 which puts the minor
seventh on top of the triad.
 
                      d
        Example 1b: Ab 7 --> Ab Cbb Ebb Gb
 
                      d
        Example 2b: G# 7 --> G# B D F
 
There!  I think I've beaten the dead horse!  :-)
 
Bill Fox        wbf@aloft.att.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 21:42:15 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Siberian Khatru <jsouthwo@KELLER.CLARKE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: chords
In-Reply-To:  <9410050142.AA20439@keller.clarke.edu>
 
Bill,
        Sorry, but in your post you said that the raised "o" was for
half-diminished when used with seventh chords...unless every other music
text I've seen is wrong, you're looking for the raised "o" with a slash
through it when representing a half-diminished seventh chord.  And then,
to make matters worse, the fully-diminished seventh chord is represented
by the sole, raised "o" (I've never seen a "d" used...not to say that it
doesn't happen).  Please bear in mind, Bill, that this is NOT a flame, I
just wanted to set things straight.
 
Oh, that poor, poor horse.
 
Jon Southwood
jsouthwo@keller.clarke.edu
 
******************************************************************************
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem.  They're there every night, they
see it done every night, the see how it should be done every night, but
they can't do it themselves."-Brendan Behan
******************************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 21:46:34 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Siberian Khatru <jsouthwo@KELLER.CLARKE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: chords
In-Reply-To:  <9410050142.AA20439@keller.clarke.edu>
 
        Sorry to even further this bludgeoning of the poor, dead horse,
but I just noticed a further error in Bill's explanations of the chords.
In a fully-diminished seventh chord, it is a DIMINISHED seventh which is
added to the diminished triad (enharmonic to a major sixth-->C, Eb, Gb,
Bbb(A) ).  In a half-diminished seventh chord, it is a MINOR seventh
which is added to the diminished triad (ie.-->C, Eb, Gb, Bb).  Once
again, not a flame, just a correction.
 
Jon Southwood
jsouthwo@keller.clarke.edu
 
******************************************************************************
"Critics are like eunuchs in a harem.  They're there every night, they
see it done every night, the see how it should be done every night, but
they can't do it themselves."-Brendan Behan
******************************************************************************
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 24 Sep 1994 19:21:47 GMT+07
Reply-To:     Ivan@hme.ee.itb.ac.id
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         IC 104 Permana <IVAN@HME.EE.ITB.AC.ID>
Organization: Himpunan Mahasiswa Elektro ITB
Subject:      hello everybody
 
Hi !
 
I'm from Indonesia. I'm a new member of this discussion. I use korg M1 as my
synthesizer. We connect the keyboard to computer via sound blaster card.I've
made some song with it.
 
I'm having a trouble with knowing the masters of this stuff. Can you help me ?
Here we have some Indonesian musician who can play MIDI very well. For example
the Kla Project Group. Their song 'Yogyakarta' is the best MIDI song in
Indonesia (at least I think). I've made this music to voyetra. Anybody
Interested ?
 
I hope I can contribute and get something from this society. Here in ITB I feel
like lone ranger.
 
:-) Ivan Cahya Permana
    Music is my life !!!
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 02:47:42 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Jody Whitesides." <Amalgam@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Electric Guitar Distortion
 
Well I'll tell ya...
 
I use a Mesa/Boogie Tri-axis, and I have to say that it is the most versatile
pre-amp I've ever used.  It has full real-time midi control and just about
every sound from the cleanest cleans to the dirtiest distortion.  I've had
digitechs and ADAs but the MB Tri-axis blows 'em all away.
 
Chuss!
 
Jody Whitesides
 
"It's what's played between the notes that's golden."
Amalgam@aol.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 21:04:50 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: TASCAM DA88
 
Hi folks,
I'd be a bit worried about the DA88.  Pairs of tracks are multiplexed.  When
you record onto track 1, the machine reads 1 and 2 and re-writes 1 and 2.  On
the other hand, the ADAT has discrete tracks which makes it safer for
recording, drop-outs and error correction.  Need something more sophisticated?
Look at the Fostex ADAT compatible machine.  It's supposed the be pretty
good.
 
Regards, David.
 
P.S. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation was looking at some of these
machines and I heard they were also reticent about the DA88.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 21:25:15 +1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Rodger <MUSDR@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
Hi Keith,
thanks for the clarification.
 
>While refering to pop music in
general, my statement really was in regards to works self referential to the
degree that their emotional/deep structure content is rarified to the point
of faliure in establishing communication with listners.
 
Dear me.  You aren't one of these people who thinks emotion is somehow encoded
in music, are you?  If so, please explain how. I've yet to hear a convincing
explanation (even after Langer, Meyer, Kivy, et. al.).  Try reading John
Shepherd's "Music as Social Process" (Polity Press, 1991).  I haven't made
up my mind yet, but he certainly gives a refreshing slant to the argument.
Sorry, I've no time at present to elaborate.  If you can't track this dowm,
I would be happy to reply at another time.
 
Regards, David. <musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au>
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 09:34:25 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
>Dear me.  You aren't one of these people who thinks emotion is somehow encoded
>in music, are you?  If so, please explain how. I've yet to hear a convincing
>explanation (even after Langer, Meyer, Kivy, et. al.).
 
I'm afraid I can't remember the researcher's name, and my tape of it now
has "Earth vs. The Spider" on top of it now, but I do remember a NOVA
special in which a researcher was trying to come up with audio "shapes"
denoting different emotions. He had done some cross-cultural work that
seemed to confirm that there were correlations between these shapes and
emotional states.
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"At the end of the hour, we'll have information on the sedatives used by
the artists,,," (MST3K)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 08:37:20 +662900
Reply-To:     "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@HEINOUS.ISCA.UIOWA.EDU>
Organization: Heinous Owners Club And Persons With Nine Letter Names
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <199410042316.SAA29534.198A7@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
 
On Tue, 4 Oct 1994, Keith Bowers wrote:
 
> I was being intentionaly obscure here. While refering to pop music in
> general, my statement really was in regards to works self referential to the
> degree that their emotional/deep structure content is rarified to the point
> of faliure in establishing communication with listners.
 
Which works?  Which listeners?  "Communication" according to a technical
description, such as Shannon and Weaver, or in some metaphysical,
metaphorical, non-specific, questionably meaningful, sense?
 
If someone calls me on the phone, and I don't pick it up, did that person
"fail to establish communication"?
 
What, specifically, does Beethoven "communicate" to an audience?  Is
Beethoven a *good* composer because he communicates the notion that
attendance at orchestral concerts is a sign of upward mobility?
 
As for "emotion", the fact that music can *convey* emotion does not mean
that music can *contain* emotion.  I'd be interested in seeing anyone
demonstrate that emotion is a thing that can be contained by anything,
even people.  Of course, if you simply accept that no music has any
emotional *content*, you won't have to suffer disappointment that a search
for such content comes up empty.
 
>  I remember well Michael Gielen being chased from his music directors post in
> Cincinnati during the 80's for programing what was, in the orchestra's view,
> too many 2nd V. school works. This was actually a revolt on the part of
> professional orchestra musicians who would presumably have an advanced
> understanding of musical syntax. If Schoenberg and his followers works were
> so self referntial that even professional musicians could not or would not be
> able to make the links that make a work transcend being a historical
> curiosity what is to be expected from the general concert going public?
 
Counter-anecdote:  The New York Phil protested the appearance of Glenn
Gould as a soloist with them only 30-some years ago.  If the collective
intelligence of that orchestra can be so wide of the mark, I'd imagine
that the folks in the Cincinatti orchestra may have simply made a
well-intentioned mistake.
 
> It is In this way I speak of Schoenberg's faliure. HIs solution to the
> problems of construting works resulted in either the loss of deep structures
> that are intrinsic to musical communication or so revolutonary that the
> general listener needs another 100 years to catch up.
 
Well, the "general listener" doesn't have the slightest clue about rocket
science, either.  Interestingly enough, NASA's funding has recently been
going downhill.  It sounds to me like Schoenberg isn't the one who
"failed".  The fact that a large group of people don't understand
Schoenberg doesn't really prove much of anything.  What's more interesting
to me is to investigate what it is they think they "understand" about the
music which they believe they *do* understand.
 
The music of J. S. Bach was largely unknown outside of professional music
circles until Mendelssohn and others started including Bach regularly on
concert programs.  As I recall, that was about 75 years after Bach's
death.  It hasn't been 75 years since the death of Schoenberg yet.  To
borrow a phrase, I suspect that reports on the "death" of Schoenberg's
music are premature.
 
That's my 4 half-pennies for today.
 
-- Kirk
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dr. Kirk Corey                 [insert       Electronic Systems Administrator
kirk-corey@uiowa.edu          disclaimer                      School of Music
                                here]                  The University of Iowa
    "Msdos?  MSDOS? I've seen CALCULATORS with a better operating system!"
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:11:18 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
> Hi Keith,
> thanks for the clarification.
>
> >While refering to pop music in
> general, my statement really was in regards to works self referential to the
> degree that their emotional/deep structure content is rarified to the point
> of faliure in establishing communication with listners.
>
> Dear me.  You aren't one of these people who thinks emotion is somehow encoded
> in music, are you?  If so, please explain how. I've yet to hear a convincing
 
I distinctly hear the crackle of the old emotion-in-music flames coming
back to life. I don't think anyone will ever quite sort out to what
degree music is inherently emotional. It may be that at some core level
there's some sort of universal emotional response to certain musical
phenomenon, but after that the bulk of it is cultural. Music expresses
what we decide it expresses. In western music a tremendously large
percent of what constitutes expression is based upon the treatment of
consonance and dissonance. What constitutes consonance and dissonance is
also determined by convention, although the harmonic series lies at the
root of it. If indeed there is any "absolute" emotion in music, I would
say it must relate to the way in which we respond to the harmonic series.
Generally, the closer to the fundamental you get, the more consonant the
interval is. I'm no ethnomusicologist, but of all the "world musics" I've
heard there are precious few that don't use the unison, fifth and octave
as points of rest. In western music the perfect fourth is for some reason
considered dissonant, because we've come to prefer the more distant
interval of the third (distant in terms of its relation to the
fundamental of the harmonic series, that is. Also, parenthetically,
Schoenberg used to maintain that his music wasn't really atonal, he was
just exploring the more extremely distant intervals of the harmonic series).
 
So, when we come to mixing consonant and dissonant intervals in music we
demand that the dissonance should resolve to a consonance, and we specify
the manner in which it should be resolved. It is considered expressive to
use dissonance and then resolve it in the manner specified. It is also
considered expressive to set up a dissonance and resolve it in a manner
other than the one usually specified. It is also considered expressive to
set up a dissonance in the prescribed manner and not resolve it at all,
or to introduce a dissonance in a non-prescribed manner and then resolve
it in the conventional way. In all case it is assumed that the listener
comes equipped with an extremely detailed set of expectations and that
the music will constantly refer back to this "database" and move the
listener either by conforming to or frustrating his expectations.
 
Atonal music may be said to be "self-referential" in that it rejects all
the consonance/dissonance-based expectations of the audience, which as I
said before, makes up a very large bulk of what we've come to consider
emotional. In the 12-tone system, tonal and intervalic relations are
determined by the row chosen by the composer, rather than from the
collective memory bank of the audience. Schoenberg himself used the
phrase "12 tones related only to each other".
 
So if atonal music appears to lack emotion it's because we haven't come
up with a conventional way to respond to it. Perhaps we never will.
There's no law that says we have to. If audiences want to stay away from
atonal music, there ain't nothin' that's gonna stop 'em.
 
There are other conventions that I haven't mentioned which deal with
rhythm and melodic/motivic repetition. Most, perhaps all of the atonal
music that I like makes generous use of these conventions.
 
Enough, already!
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:05:30 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "william.b.fox" <wbf@ALOFT.ATT.COM>
Subject:      Re: chords
 
Jon and I continue to bludgeon that poor, dead horse!  I think that
either I learned a different system than Jon (o and d vs. slashed o and
o) making us both right or my mid 70s music theory classes are too far
back in history for me to remember things clearly!  Upon rechecking
rules in the back of my mind, I recall that all intervals in the fully
diminished seventh chord are minor thirds.  That makes Jon correct
that the root to seventh interval is a diminished seventh, not a minor
seventh like I had (mis-)stated.  (Damn!)
 
Neigh!
 
Bill Fox        wbf@aloft.att.com
 
.........................................................Women Respond to Bass
                                - Tamara Palmer
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 09:21:42 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Michael D. Whitten" <M-WHIT2@VM1.SPCS.UMN.EDU>
Subject:      deep structure in obscura
 
Joe McMahon wrote,
>>Dear me. You aren't one of these people who thinks emotion is somehow encoded
>>in music, are you?  If so, please explain how. I've yet to hear a convincing
>>explanation (even after Langer, Meyer, Kivy, et. al.).
>
>I'm afraid I can't remember the researcher's name, and my tape of it now
>has "Earth vs. The Spider" on top of it now, but I do remember a NOVA
>special in which a researcher was trying to come up with audio "shapes"
>denoting different emotions. He had done some cross-cultural work that
>seemed to confirm that there were correlations between these shapes and
>emotional states.
>
> --- Joe M.
 
"Earth vs The Spider" WAS the NOVA episode, Joe!
 
Seriously, I also recall reading in Scientific American about what is
probably this same researcher and his investigations.  The best example
he discovered about one-to-one correspondence between music and human emotion
is this:  an ascending-and-terminating pitch denotes happy while a
descending-and-terminating pitch denotes sadness.  This idea seems to
permeate all languages, primitive, musical, and otherwise - according to
this particular researcher.  If someone can remember which SA this was....
post it!
 
best wishes,
 
Michael

----------------------------------------------------------
Michael Whitten            |
m-whit2@vm1.spcs.umn.edu   |
mw@lenti.med.umn.edu       |  "Sentience is over-rated."
----------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:48:35 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Magnus Barber <J.M.Barber@BNR.CO.UK>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <"26258 Wed Oct 5 13:36:12 1994"@bnr.co.uk>
 
         Hi!
 
              I haven't followed the discussion - I only read a mail from
         Joe M by chance about emotion in music, and a scientist with
         "shapes" corresponding to music.... forgive me if it's already
         mentioned or not interesting!
 
              I read an article in New Scientist (or somesuch) saying that
         certain frequencies affect the human body/mind in certain ways.
         For example, low frequencies - especially in lively rythm can give
         feelings of euphoria, aggression or simmilar. Other frequencies
         have other effects.
 
              mb
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 09:07:33 PST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Roger I. Ramnath" <Roger_Ramnath@CC.WDI.DISNEY.COM>
Subject:      Re[2]: Electric Guitar Distortion
 
>Well I'll tell ya...
 
>I use a Mesa/Boogie Tri-axis, and I have to say that it is the most versatile
>pre-amp I've ever used.  It has full real-time midi control and just about
>every sound from the cleanest cleans to the dirtiest distortion.  I've had
>digitechs and ADAs but the MB Tri-axis blows 'em all away.
 
>Chuss!
 
>Jody Whitesides
 
>"It's what's played between the notes that's golden."
>Amalgam@aol.com
 
 
I used to say, "Analog or digital distortion is just as good as tube distortion"
but that was before I really explored the sound you get from a quality tube amp.
 
I used to use an MXR Distortion + pedal, a Hiwatt 100 wt amp, a Rockman, a
Yamaha combo amp, and probably a bunch of other set-ups I can't remember.
 
I now have a Mesa Boogie Mark IV, the best investment I've ever made for my
guitar setup.  Killer cleans, nasty distortion, and everything inbetween.  I
would swear by them.
 
Roger (who doesn't work for, or is indorsed by Mesa Boogie, although I wouldn't
mind a free amp or two)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:19:14 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
>
> Well, the "general listener" doesn't have the slightest clue about rocket
> science, either.  Interestingly enough, NASA's funding has recently been
> going downhill.  It sounds to me like Schoenberg isn't the one who
> "failed".  The fact that a large group of people don't understand
> Schoenberg doesn't really prove much of anything.  What's more interesting
> to me is to investigate what it is they think they "understand" about the
> music which they believe they *do* understand.
 
Here we have the old academic "who cares if you listen" attitude that so
pervades the ivy towers of our university music departments. Academic
composers like Babbitt (whose sentiments you echo in this posting) are
nothing more than frustrated scientist wannabes. Yeah, wouldn't it be
great if the music department could get all that nifty equipment and
lavish facilities that the physics dept. gets, with no one outside the
discipline looking too hard at what you're doing.
 
Well music ain't rocket science. Provided you've done your calculations
correctly, a rocket will fly. But a piece of music doesn't fly until the
folks out in the audience who don't know a retrograde inversion from a
backhoe sit up and go "Wow, this stuff is really great! When can I hear
this again?!!"
 
If they don't, you may still win your Pulitzer Prize. You may even have a
better chance of winning it if they don't. But ultimately your music is
dead as Lenin if people won't listen to it and enjoy it. That's just the
way it is.
 
Mark Simon
mgs2cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:58:30 LCL
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Michael Carnes <mc@LEXICON.COM>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <9410051514.AA17152@ursa-major.spdcc.com>
 
----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: text
X-Sun-Data-Description: text
X-Sun-Data-Name: text
X-Sun-Content-Lines: 11
X-Sun-Content-Length: 757
 
The comments on various frequencies having different effects brought an old
story to mind.  I knew a bass player about 15-20 years back who had read
some article that particular low frequencies could cause orgasms.  He
asked me (in all seriousness) how he could rig up some device that would
play these low frequencies while he gigged, therebye increasing his
chances of meeting --shall we say-- interesting friends.
 
There are small bits of evidence that suggest certain effects, but these
effects are quite weak and are generally obliterated when the environment
is rich in stimuli.  As far as placing strict emotional meaning on various
frequencies, it's probably a good idea to make sure those same emotions
are also conveyed by more reproducable means.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:25:00 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Peter Mueller <Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re[2]: SCHOEN AND MIDIBERG
 
"Xenakis is another story, to be honest i don't know how much attention he
pays to tonality, other than it is neither traditional nor twelve tone."
     He doesn't. With him it has to do with issues of chaos theory. Seems
     scary, but he writes great music. Really cool emusic, too.
"A while ago someone asked if Morton Subotnick was still composing, i beleave
he still is, "
Your correct, he is. And he's still at CalArts.
 "He has co/authored a book which on first glance seems to be tied in with
somantics (or semiotics) and music. "
 Are you thinking of the other Subotnick, the musicologist?
 
"Enough "old school" discography, there ya go."
 
"I haven't actually tried microtonal composition.  Maybe i should start with
quarter tones (i hope this is right) which could lead to a total of 24
possible notes.  It wouldn't be that hard to dedicate two midi channels to a
single timbre, having one ch detuned for the 1/4 step.  (my synth set up
doesn't allow for compression of the octave)."
 
"Do i need to exhume Harry Partch?" Not exhume, but do listen to him.
     Check out the mag 1/1, and microtonal list, and don't forget Ezra Sims
     (he uses 12 tones per whole step), James Tenney, or Ben Johnston, to
     name a few.
 
>-- Saved internet headers (useful for debugging)
>Received: from AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU by ucsd.edu; id PAA29306 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2
>Message-Id: <199410042213.PAA29306@ucsd.edu>
>Received: from AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU by AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)   with
>Received: from AMERICAN.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@AUVM) by AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU (LM
>Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 16:56:42 EDT
>Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
>Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
>From: "Leo T. Nutley" <Schmeggi@AOL.COM>
>Subject:      Re: SCHOEN AND MIDIBERG
>Comments: To: EMUSIC-L@american.edu
>To: Multiple recipients of list EMUSIC-L <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
>X-CCaddr: Bcc: peter mueller AT ucsdlibrary
>X-CCaddr: *To: EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU at @UCSD
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:31:42 MST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Trent Hare GD.Flagstaff 602556-7245" <thare@SIRIUS.WR.USGS.GOV>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
more stupid stories,
 
I have heard the same story about frequencies however
the story I heard was that a certain frequecy caused
you bladder to let go if exposed constantly to it for
about seven minutes.  Even though I created this
low frequency and looped it (the woofer was massively
vibrating) I wondered if the amp and the woofers would
even be able to reproduce a frequency that low???
Never finished the test though.  If anyone wants to
try I can dig up the fequency.
 
                                        thare
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:36:12 +662900
Reply-To:     "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@HEINOUS.ISCA.UIOWA.EDU>
Organization: Heinous Owners Club And Persons With Nine Letter Names
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <199410051622.LAA02131.198A7@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
 
On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Mark G Simon wrote:
 
> Here we have the old academic "who cares if you listen" attitude that so
> pervades the ivy towers of our university music departments. Academic
> composers like Babbitt (whose sentiments you echo in this posting) are
> nothing more than frustrated scientist wannabes. Yeah, wouldn't it be
> great if the music department could get all that nifty equipment and
> lavish facilities that the physics dept. gets, with no one outside the
> discipline looking too hard at what you're doing.
 
Babbitt didn't choose "Who Cares if You Listen" as the title of the
article in question.  In fact, he protested the choice of that title.  The
blame doesn't lie with him.  Babbitt does in fact care who listens, so far
as I can tell.
 
At the risk of requiring future need of my asbestos undies :), if Babbitt
et al. sound like "scientist wannabees" to you, perhaps their detractors
sound like "folks who are mad they didn't get a job teaching music at
<insert name of ivy league school here>" to others.  We'd probably do best
to nip this train of thought in the bud, if you'll pardon my mix-and-match
cliches.
 
> Well music ain't rocket science. Provided you've done your calculations
> correctly, a rocket will fly. But a piece of music doesn't fly until the
> folks out in the audience who don't know a retrograde inversion from a
> backhoe sit up and go "Wow, this stuff is really great! When can I hear
> this again?!!"
 
How many folks have to clap before you think the music has achieved its
metaphorical flight?  Is majority rule a criterion for musical quality?
Agreed, music ain't rocket science.  But it ain't the Miss Universe Dog
And Pony Show, either.
 
> If they don't, you may still win your Pulitzer Prize. You may even have a
> better chance of winning it if they don't. But ultimately your music is
> dead as Lenin if people won't listen to it and enjoy it. That's just the
> way it is.
 
Yup.  But as long as one single person in the audience has a clue
concerning what I'm saying, my music is as alive as Lennon's.  :)
 
As for the Pulitzer, I don't give one hoot for it.  Remember what Ives had
to say about that one:  "Prizes are for children.  I'm grown up."  Or
something like that.
 
-- Kirk
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dr. Kirk Corey                 [insert       Electronic Systems Administrator
kirk-corey@uiowa.edu          disclaimer                      School of Music
                                here]                  The University of Iowa
    "Msdos?  MSDOS? I've seen CALCULATORS with a better operating system!"
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 10:51:00 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Peter Mueller <Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re[2]: chords
 
"Jon and I continue to bludgeon that poor, dead horse!  I think that
either I learned a different system than Jon (o and d vs. slashed o and
o) making us both right or my mid 70s music theory classes are too far
back in history for me to remember things clearly!  Upon rechecking
rules in the back of my mind, I recall that all intervals in the fully
diminished seventh chord are minor thirds.  That makes Jon correct
that the root to seventh interval is a diminished seventh, not a minor
seventh like I had (mis-)stated.  (Damn!)"
 
Just to make this even more confusing, if not obtuse, but some theorists
discribe the root, or the functional root, of a fully diminished seventh being
an imaginary tone a major third below one of the real tones.  This makes it
function like a dominant chord. One way to figure out which one of the four
possible imaginary tones is the functional root is to find the root of the
resolving chord and it's dominant should be what the dim.7 is acting as.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 14:14:51 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Thom <NEC_TWC@FLO.ORG>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
Gee this would be wild!!!
 
I once wrote a piece (never performed) called "Joey in Ecstasy" for
baritone and tape.  What a climax this would be.  [Thom chuckles and
is embarrassed by the pun]
 
t
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:23:00 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Peter Mueller <Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re[2]: deep structure in obscura
 
Yup.  But as long as one single person in the audience has a clue
concerning what I'm saying, my music is as alive as Lennon's.  :)
 
 
I agree. It may not be commercially viable, but I'm not in this business for the
big bucks (not that I would turn it down, and I do like those royalty checks
when orchestras play my music), but I write modern music because its the kind of
music I like best. Maybe its because my parents exposed me to Webern when I was
four. And yes, I do listen to Babbitt or Xenakis
after a hard day at the office. :-)
-Peter
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 14:05:39 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         David Evan Jones <David.Evan.Jones@DARTMOUTH.EDU>
Subject:      CALL FOR SHORT ALGORITHMIC COMPOSITIONS
 
        >>>>>>>> CALL FOR ALGORITHMIC SHORTS <<<<<<<<
 
The APRIL IN SANTA CRUZ Festival of Contemporary Music at the
University of California Santa Cruz announces a call for SHORT
algorithmic musical compositions to be performed in April 1995
as part of our annual celebration of new music.  The compositions
may be for small ensemble, solo performer, or MIDI piano (Yamaha
Disklavier).  Perhaps 30 algorithmic compositions will be
performed.
 
HOW SHORT?
We mean REALLY short, damn it -- 15 seconds to about 3 minutes or so.
SLIGHTLY longer pieces may be considered.
 
WHAT DO YOU MEAN ALGORITHMIC?
Our call is for musical compositions in which the set of "instructions"
(algorithms) which the composer has undertaken (or given to the performers)
is...
      ...elegantly concise, perhaps elegantly elaborated...
      ...integrated, whole, original...
      ...intriguingly transparent in the musical sound...
 
We hope to receive compositions as different, one from another, as
James Tenney's "Chromatic Canon", Pauline Oliveros' "Sonic Meditations",
Iannis Xenakis' "Atrees", and certain selections from Cage's "Songbooks"
...only SHORTER!
 
SUBMIT WHAT?
        -Score (and cassette tape if available), and/or
        -a MIDI file designed to be realized on Yamaha Disklavier.
        -Program notes and a SHORT Bio.  (Text-only files on MacIntosh Disk
        are preferred.)
        -Optionally:  an image of a page from the score or any other
abstraction representing
        the algorithm underlying the composition.  For inclusion in the
program.
        -If return of these materials is desired:  a SASE.
 
Instrumental parts must be available IMMEDIATELY in January if a work is
selected for performance.
 
MAX patches designed specifically for Disklavier are welcome and will be
implemented in MAX for the actual performance; but a standard MIDI file
representing a sample realization of the patch must be submitted for
consideration at this time.
 
DEADLINE?
All materials must be received no later than JANUARY 15, 1995.  Please
submit no more than two pieces.  (Remember to include SASE if return of
materials is desired.)   Selections will be made by FEBRUARY 1, 1995 by
a jury of three composers.
 
COMPOSITION AT UCSC:  Regular Composition Faculty at UCSC includes:
David Cope, David Evan Jones, Hi Kyung Kim, Gordon Mumma (emeritus).
Guest composer for this years APRIL IN SANTA CRUZ is James Tenney.
 
TO:
David Evan Jones, Director
APRIL IN SANTA CRUZ
Music Department
University of California
Santa Cruz, CA 95064
 
QUESTIONS:  DEJ@CATS.UCSC.EDU
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:21:23 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         BIGGERSTAFF THAD LEWIS <thad@FALCON.CC.UKANS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <01HHWV509D6A99WFSY@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU>
 
On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Michael D. Whitten wrote:
 
> Seriously, I also recall reading in Scientific American about what is
> probably this same researcher and his investigations.  The best example
> he discovered about one-to-one correspondence between music and human emotion
> is this:  an ascending-and-terminating pitch denotes happy while a
> descending-and-terminating pitch denotes sadness.  This idea seems to
> permeate all languages, primitive, musical, and otherwise - according to
> this particular researcher.  If someone can remember which SA this was....
> post it!
 
Just got into this discussion and strangely enough, I yesterday picked up
a couple of books which deal with this topic (somewhat).  Sadly, I don't
have them with me now.  One is titled Biomusicology and the other is
titled Mind Brain and Music (or something general like that).  Anyhow, I
have had time to only scim through these so far, but one specific
researcher caught my eye.  He translated muscular movement from peoples
fingertips who were experiencing a certain emotion (joy, anger, etc.) into
sound waves, then auditioned these sound waves to listeners who could in
turn discern what "original" emotion they represented.  He duplicated
these results in different cultures.  Of course, I can't remeber his name
right now either. And I didn't read enough to understand how this
translation was actually managed/rationalized.  Any body else out there
heard anything about this or critical evaluations of this?  This slant on
music is in my eyes both intriquing and dangerous, and thus of course
makes me curious about other work/research in this area... I'll write on
this later, once I have those books in front of me.
 
-Thad
 
P.s. I'd love to know which Scientific American issue it was too...
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 14:42:48 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
>
> Babbitt didn't choose "Who Cares if You Listen" as the title of the
> article in question.  In fact, he protested the choice of that title.  The
> blame doesn't lie with him.  Babbitt does in fact care who listens, so far
> as I can tell.
 
Doesn't matter who chose the title. If the shoe fits, wear it. "Who cares
if you listen" perfectly describes the contents of his famous article,
protest all he may. When the NY Phil played his "Relata I" and union
regulations forbade the taping of the performance, he was upset (as any
composer would be), but for that the stated reason that the real people
he intended the music for [i.e. his fellow profs] wouldn't get to hear it
while people who didn't matter [i.e. the general public] would. Clearly
the only ones he cares about hearing his music are his fellow academics.
Sorry, that's not good enough for me.
 
> At the risk of requiring future need of my asbestos undies :), if Babbitt
> et al. sound like "scientist wannabees" to you, perhaps their detractors
> sound like "folks who are mad they didn't get a job teaching music at
> <insert name of ivy league school here>" to others.  We'd probably do best
> to nip this train of thought in the bud, if you'll pardon my mix-and-match
> cliches.
 
You're putting the cart before the horse. They -- let's drop the pretense
-- I am not teaching at <insert name of ivy league school here> because I
disagreed with the academic attitudes I found there and wouldn't write
the academic kind of music. It was my choice and I've paid dearly for it,
and I still pay dearly for it. This is how strongly I believe in my position.
>
> How many folks have to clap before you think the music has achieved its
> metaphorical flight?  Is majority rule a criterion for musical quality?
> Agreed, music ain't rocket science.  But it ain't the Miss Universe Dog
> And Pony Show, either.
 
In my opinion the best audience for music, paradoxically perhaps, are
scientists. And I mean real scientists, not wannabes like Babbitt. Go to
any physics or chemistry department and you'll find a whole slew of
people who sing or play instruments quite proficiently. They also show up
faithfully at the local concerts. These are intelligent people, and they
enjoy music and listen intelligently. They applaud Bach and Brahms, and
if they want something more contemporary they'll put on Brian Eno. They
won't listen to Milton Babbitt or Anton Webern or Brian Ferneyhough. They
deal with dry calculations all day in their work. Why should they have it
in their music.
 
OK this is generalizing. Scientists are as individual as anybody else,
but the point is, it's not a choice between pandering to the dunderheads
who scream at Jesus Jones concerts or licking the butts of egg-headed
professors. There are intelligent listeners out there who have concluded
that orchestras, string quartets, opera, the whole works are irrelevant
bullshit because they only do dead composers, or modern composers who
sound worse than dead. They're turning away from "classical" music
altogether. We can't just say "fuck em all, what do they know" or "75
years from now I'll be as famous as Beethoven". Hell, 75 years from now
there'll be no more orcestras to play your mighty masterworks, or
Schoenberg's, or Mozart's or anyone else's. It is absolutely essential
for the survival of the art that we "serious" composers cultivate a
sizable audience of whatever intelligent people there are outside of the
"new music" community, in fact outside of the music community altogether.
No, we don't have to be able to fill monster stadium concerts like the
rock groups do, but this small tiny tiny minority of a minority "new
music" community is entirely too "self-referential".
 
>
> > If they don't, you may still win your Pulitzer Prize. You may even have a
> > better chance of winning it if they don't. But ultimately your music is
> > dead as Lenin if people won't listen to it and enjoy it. That's just the
> > way it is.
>
> Yup.  But as long as one single person in the audience has a clue
> concerning what I'm saying, my music is as alive as Lennon's.  :)
 
I presume that one person is your mother.
 
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 11:50:00 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Peter Mueller <Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re[2]: frequency orgasms
 
Gee this would be wild!!!
 
I once wrote a piece (never performed) called "Joey in Ecstasy" for
baritone and tape.  What a climax this would be.  [Thom chuckles and
is embarrassed by the pun]
 
t
 
 
Hey. Does this have anything to do with that Don Martino piece "Stripsody" for
solo percussion?
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:05:25 -0300
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Diego Basch <dbasch@DELEC.EDU.AR>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  <94Oct5.145916arg.18474@secyt.gov.ar>; from "Trent Hare
              GD.Flagstaff 602556-7245" at Oct 5, 94 2:31 pm
 
>
> I have heard the same story about frequencies however
> the story I heard was that a certain frequecy caused
> you bladder to let go if exposed constantly to it for
> about seven minutes.  Even though I created this
...........
> even be able to reproduce a frequency that low???
> Never finished the test though.  If anyone wants to
> try I can dig up the fequency.
>
>                                         thare
 
Yes, please. I'd like to try. But if it's lower than 20 Hz, I doubt I can
make it sound through a regular sound system. Imagine, seven minutes of
that sound at a college cafeteria! :-)
 
 
--
                        Diego M. Basch
                        dbasch@delec.edu.ar
                        Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:26:07 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Leo T. Nutley" <Schmeggi@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: frequency and bio responce
 
Magnus Barber <J.M.Barber@BNR.CO.UK> sez
>             I read an article in New Scientist (or somesuch) >saying that
 >        certain frequencies affect the human body/mind in >certain ways.
>         For example, low frequencies - especially in lively >rythm can give
>         feelings of euphoria, aggression or simmilar. Other >frequencies
>         have other effects.
 
i remember going through a book on reggae music, and there was this drawing
of a very happy dreadlocked fellow, and next to him was this chart with a
range of frequencies (incl. subharmonic) with little arrows pointing to
various parts of his body.  the blurb underneath briefly explained that the
body's organs act as resonating chambers, respinding to various sounds, and
that dancing was a responce to the effects of those sounds.  kinda funny
intro to the subject.
 
 
 
i wouldn't mind hearing about sound and it's effects on brainwave states (ie
alpha, theta, delta), how frequency can affect alertness, relaxation, sleep
or meditation.
 
the info i have so far:
 
 0.5 - 4.05 hz = delta, or an endorphin releasing state.
 4.0 - 8.0 hz = theta or a learning/receptive state.
 8.0 - 12.0 hz = alpha or a meditative state.
12.0 + hz (< 20) = beta, concentration(?).
 
i also recall seeing elsewhere the plans for a subharmonic generator, a huge
tube powered by a likewise huge fan or blowerer, that was supposed to produce
enough dB's to affect everyone in, say, a quarter mile radius.  of course the
tome would be too low to "hear".  the instructions promised euphoric feelings
along with a loss of bodily functions.
 
enough
leo
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 12:50:53 MST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Trent Hare GD.Flagstaff 602556-7245" <thare@SIRIUS.WR.USGS.GOV>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
Off the top of my head I believe the bladder frequecy
is 7 Hz.  Have fun.
 
                        thare
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 15:14:20 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Harry F.P. Haecker" <haeckerh@OSPREY.NWRC.GOV>
Subject:      Re[2]: frequency and bio responce
 
>the instructions promised euphoric feelings along with a loss of bodily
>functions.
 
This had better *NOT* work, or the government will begin Congressional
hearings on how to outlaw certain sound frequencies, or prohibit their use
by minors...or require a license/tax to listen! ;-)
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:29:57 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: hello everybody
In-Reply-To:  <199410050444.VAA23536@mail2.netcom.com> from "IC 104 Permana" at
              Sep 24, 94 07:21:47 pm
 
IC 104 Permana says
>
>Hi !
>
>I'm from Indonesia. I'm a new member of this discussion. I use korg M1 as my
>synthesizer. We connect the keyboard to computer via sound blaster card.I've
>made some song with it.
>
>I'm having a trouble with knowing the masters of this stuff. Can you help me ?
>Here we have some Indonesian musician who can play MIDI very well. For example
>the Kla Project Group. Their song 'Yogyakarta' is the best MIDI song in
>Indonesia (at least I think). I've made this music to voyetra. Anybody
>Interested ?
 
This is interesting! We don't hear often from your part of the world;
welcome to EMUSIC-L. By 'MIDI' songs do you refer to music made with
professional MIDI gear, or are you more interested in music created on
computer-based sound card platforms? In other words, is this song
you're offering something that is merely MIDI data, or is it actually
sampled sound to be played back on a soundcard f some sort?
 
>I hope I can contribute and get something from this society. Here in ITB I feel
>like lone ranger.
 
I can believe it. I've been on the net for eight years and you're the
first Indonseian musician I've seen here (though my memory is poor
in some areas). I would like to hear more about how electronics are
being integrated into the traditional and popular music styles of
your country; this list has at least one American gamelan player,
but a perspective from Indonesia itself would be very nice. I would
also like to suggest that you subscribe to SYNTH-L, also at this
list server, for discussions of technical matters and particular
pieces of music equipment.
 
>:-) Ivan Cahya Permana
>    Music is my life !!!
 
I know the feeling ;->
 
mike
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bumper stickers advertising BREAK, a new weekly entertainment newspaper for
ultra-jammin' Tallahassee, Florida, read:  "Even shit doesn't happen here."
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:22:08 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  <199410051817.LAA09410@mail2.netcom.com> from "Thom" at Oct 5,
              94 02:14:51 pm
 
In response to a few requests via privte email (y'all know who you
are), I'd like to say a thing or two on the subject of
emotional/physical responses to sound and music. I've done a bit of
reading and experimenting on the subject, and can share some
admittedly fragmentary and occasionally anecdotal evidence with
you. In that light, let me pass along what little I know....
 
I am a physicist, but not an acoustician. My background in the field
consists of the basic wave mechanics and resonance theory any physical
scientist is expected to know, augmented somewhat by my years of work
in electronic music in and out of academia. I have spoken to, and
worked in the studio with, several people with more experience than I
in the field, including Dr. John Rossi III, a name that might be
familiar to some of you. John 3, when he's not yanking people's chains
on the Net, is a Ph.D. in neuropharmacology and studies physical
reactions to external stimuli, including sound. I will paraphrase some
of what he told me, a bit later.
 
I have on record the following anecdotal evidence for physiological
effects of sounds:
 
An article in the USENET newsgroup rec.music.synth two years ago
reported that a programmer discovered the following text "buried in
the online help" for the function sound() within Borland C++ 3.0.
 
[begin quote]
 
 /* Emits a 7-Hz tone for 10 seconds.
 
      True story: 7 Hz is the resonant
      frequency of a chicken's skull cavity.
      This was determined empirically in
      Australia, where a new factory
      generating 7-Hz tones was located too
      close to a chicken ranch: When the
      factory started up, all the chickens
      died.
 
      Your PC may not be able to emit a 7-Hz tone. */
 
 #include <dos.h>
 
 int main(void)
 {
    sound(7);
    delay(10000);
    nosound();
    return 0;
 }
 
[end quote]
 
I have never attempted to use this code or to verify the original
source of the news (Australia is conveniently far away as an
apocryphal source); several respondents to this post claimed that they
were unable to produce any results on any animals with this code or
other means of generating 7 Hz tones.
 
Another interesting story is told by New Age musician Craig Huxley,
inventor of the Blaster Beam, an electro-acoustic instrument which is
essentially a seventeen-foot steel guitar strung with bridge cables.
(It is best known for its use in the soundtrack to STAR TREK: THE
MOTION PICTURE, in which the signature theme-tone for the alien ship
V'ger was created by striking the Beam hard with a polished
artillery-shell casing.) Mr. Huxley reports that at an outdoor
concert he gave in New York City several years ago, in which he played
the Beam at high amplification for several minutes, several women
(between three and six) approached him after the concerts and reported
varying degrees of sexual excitement resulting from the tone of the
Beam, including two orgasms.  Again, this story is apocryphal, and
could be complete fabrication on Mr. Huxley's part; it is, however,
intriguingly consistent with other information.
 
As for my own experiences, I have had exposure to physical effects of
sound in two instances. The first was a sound I created on my Xpander
a number of years ago as a sound-effect pad under a piece for my first
band project; while it had little or no direct effect on almost anyone
who listened to it other than to evoke comments on its nastiness (it
was a harsh ring-modulated tone with an effect somewhat like a Shepard
tone, as discussed here recently), there was one young woman who
reported repeated and consistent feelings of sexual excitement when
the sound was played in her presence, and who expressed a strong
desire for it to continue after it was turned off. No other individual
has ever reported a similar reaction. I was of course interested in
pursuing this effect, but had no further luck with it other than to
spawn general hilarity on rec.music.synth with my reports on "Project
SyntheSex," the text of which is happily lost forever.
 
The second was the whole field of audiogenic seizure activity, to
which I was introduced recently by John Rossi III. Apparently some
animals (rodents and lower primates) can be stimulated to undergo
seizure activity by the application of certain sounds, much in the
same way that certain humans can be forced into epileptic seizures by
flashing lights. Certain types of animals seize audiogenically rather
easily, and their behavior is studied in some subfields of behavioral
neuroscience.  The circumstances under which these seizures are
induced provided me with a link that allowed me to (roughly and
crudely) group the common characteristics of all of the abovementioned
sounds; namely, amplitude in addition to resonant characteristics.
 
I do not believe that there is a particular soundwave that can induce
orgasm, seizure activity, or death merely on its own. I believe that
the effects seen here are a complex interaction of individual
(species?)  physiology, harmonic structure and evolution of timbre,
resonant characteristics of the body, and energy transmitted by the
sound. For instance, the tacit assumption is made that it was strictly
the frequency of 7 Hz that killed the chickens in Australia; I would
argue that if it was a factory that caused the deaths, the tone could
have come from machinery that generated a high level of sound pressure
at that frequency. Further, the Beam at the New York concert was
played through a massive sound system at very high volume, and my
Xpander patch seemed most effective when played through a 300-watt
bass amp with four 15" woofers at high volume. John 3 tells me that
audiogenic seizures cannot be induced without extremely high levels of
sound input (well above 100 dB SPL). This implies that the deciding
factor here is an amount of energy delivered to the body or brain at
an appropriate resonant frequency, although that is merely supposition
on my part.
 
In conclusion, I would say that in order to reproduce this sort of
behavior in humans, one would have to generate whatever sound is
believed to work at very high volumes, and that at this time there is
no direct evidence that any particular sound wave has a general effect
on human beings when played at moderate levels (treating the Huxley
story and my experience as statistical flukes). For those who want to
experiment on their own, I suggest a lot of bass energy, the largest
subwoofers available, suitable ear protection for all concerned, and a
keen sense of the ridiculous.
 
And I hope that's all I have to say on this subject.
 
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bumper stickers advertising BREAK, a new weekly entertainment newspaper for
ultra-jammin' Tallahassee, Florida, read:  "Even shit doesn't happen here."
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 13:36:58 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: SCHOEN AND MIDIBERG
In-Reply-To:  <199410042212.PAA24988@mail3.netcom.com> from "Leo T. Nutley" at
              Oct 4, 94 04:56:42 pm
 
Leo T. Nutley say
>
>Xenakis is another story, to be honest i don't know how much attention he
>pays to tonality, other than it is neither traditional nor twelve tone.
 
Well, i wish I knew more about his work; I've heard a live performance of
his percussion piece for the SiXXen, and have heard (once) the Nonesuch
recording of Bohor I, arguably the first recorded piece of industrial
noisepainthrashmusic.
 
>A while ago someone asked if Morton Subotnick was still composing, i beleave
>he still is, although the last work of his i purchased (The Key To Songs;
>Return) was published in 1986.  He has co/authored a book which on first
>glance seems to be tied in with somantics (or semiotics) and music.  Fred
>Frith's "The Technology Of Tears" seems to be akin to Subotnick's style.
 
He's out there; I think others have more recent data on him than I.
 
>I haven't actually tried microtonal composition.  Maybe i should start with
>quarter tones (i hope this is right) which could lead to a total of 24
>possible notes.  It wouldn't be that hard to dedicate two midi channels to a
>single timbre, having one ch detuned for the 1/4 step.  (my synth set up
>doesn't allow for compression of the octave).
 
This is too bad; I've messed with 19-tone and 31-tone scales on my
Xpander and have found them very intriguing. Differences in the
timbral quality of various intervals with respect to one another and
with respect to equal temperament stand out startlingly. The trick is
to find a number of tones per octave that results in good ratios of
frequencies (fifths, thirds, etc.); I'm not sure how good quarter tones
are except as an approximation, although I've seen a lot of synths
with quarter-tone tunings available.
 
>Do i need to exhume Harry Partch? And what about the Aphex twin.
 
I beg pardon? What does Partch have to do with Richard James?
 
--
mike metlay * atomic city * box 81175 pgh pa 15217-0675 * atomic@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bumper stickers advertising BREAK, a new weekly entertainment newspaper for
ultra-jammin' Tallahassee, Florida, read:  "Even shit doesn't happen here."
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 16:52:44 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Phil Skiba <SPS5251%SIENA.BITNET@VM.ITS.RPI.EDU>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
kindly dig up that freq, I think the people here would be "tickled" by it.
 
;^)
 
Phil
sps5251@siena.bitnet
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 16:19:57 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Kevan L. Moore" <kevan@MX6.MSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: resonant frequency
 
> I am a physicist, but not an acoustician. My background in the field
> consists of the basic wave mechanics and resonance theory any physical
> scientist is expected to know, augmented somewhat by my years of work
> in electronic music in and out of academia. I have spoken to, and
 
of much LESS significance is the fact that while quietly humming to myself
in a stall in the men's room, i discovered that the resonant frequency
of the stall was roughly the 2nd G below middle C.  i found that no
matter how quietly i hummed the G the volume in the stall was the same.
i could go up a step and there was no resonance; all i heard was me.
 
 
yes, this opens up TONS of jokes, but there's been nobody i can tell that
to that would appreciate the physics of it.
 
klm
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 17:49:32 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Burton Beerman <BBEERMA@OPIE.BGSU.EDU>
Subject:      chords
 
The o for for half-dminished I believe is used by the Paul Harder theory text
(formerly of Michigan State University) and I believe that he used a dim for
the fully diminished.  I don't know if this is of interest, but if so perhaps
there is a former student of his can verify this and explain why.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 18:04:12 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Karen Anne Martin <45650@EF.GC.MARICOPA.EDU>
Subject:      Finale help on the Net?
 
Does anyone know of an Internet source(s) where one can find help with the
Mac version of Finale? Any format will do (gopher, ftp, telnet, etc.).
Drop me a line...thanks in advance.
 
kmartin457
=========================================================================
Date:         Tue, 4 Oct 1994 19:57:38 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Arne Claassen ISE <claassen@EBS330.EB.UAH.EDU>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  <9410041735.AA16743@ebs330> from "Trent Hare GD.Flagstaff
              602556-7245" at Oct 5, 94 10:31:42 am
 
> I have heard the same story about frequencies however
> the story I heard was that a certain frequecy caused
> you bladder to let go if exposed constantly to it for
> about seven minutes.  Even though I created this
> low frequency and looped it (the woofer was massively
> vibrating) I wondered if the amp and the woofers would
> even be able to reproduce a frequency that low???
> Never finished the test though.  If anyone wants to
> try I can dig up the fequency.
 
Why didn't you finish the test? Did you have to go to the bathroom?
 
Sorry, couldn't resist that one.
 
--
Arne F. Claassen           <claassen@ebs330.eb.uah.edu>  <psycho@io.uah.edu>
On the Web:           <http://isl-garnet.uah.edu/psychohttp/psychohome.html>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Somebody's got his finger on a DX7!"                             <MST3k>
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 23:33:57 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Leo T. Nutley" <Schmeggi@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: subotnik correction
 
yes, twas the musicologist Rose Rosengar Subotnik, 'Developing
Variations-Style and Ideology in Western Music"
oops.
=========================================================================
Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 21:34:19 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nate Waddoups <natew@HALCYON.COM>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <199410051722.AA22362@halcyon.com>
 
On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Michael Carnes wrote:
 
> The comments on various frequencies having different effects brought an old
> story to mind.  I knew a bass player about 15-20 years back who had read
> some article that particular low frequencies could cause orgasms.  He
> asked me (in all seriousness) how he could rig up some device that would
> play these low frequencies while he gigged, therebye increasing his
> chances of meeting --shall we say-- interesting friends.
 
Can't be true.  If it was, some researcher would have a multi-platinum
album titled "On the effects of low-frequency auditory stimulus upon the
mammalian pleasure centers."
 
Heck, I'd buy two copies.
 
> There are small bits of evidence that suggest certain effects, but these
> effects are quite weak and are generally obliterated when the environment
> is rich in stimuli.  As far as placing strict emotional meaning on various
> frequencies, it's probably a good idea to make sure those same emotions
> are also conveyed by more reproducable means.
 
I've read a thing or two about sending different low frequencies into
each ear - supposedly, the subject's brain waves fall into synch with the
difference between the two frequencies, and meditative states can be
induced this way.  Interesting idea.
+-------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
| natew@halcyon.com | You write Windows code?  Mac code?  OS/2 PM code?
+-------------------+ Want a great job in the pacific northwest?
                      Send me email, we'll talk...
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:12:31 EST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "<Clive McFarland>" <clive@PELICAN.DBE.CSIRO.AU>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
>Off the top of my head I believe the bladder frequecy
>is 7 Hz.  Have fun.
>
 
Anatomically interesting concept.
 
Several years ago there were reports of research (in the UK I think) into
use of low frequency sound as a form of riot control.  What was never clear
to me was:
 
a)  How the custodians of the law were protected from the effects
 
b)  Who was going to clear up afterwards
 
Clive
 
Clive McFarland         CSIRO Australia         clive@pelican.dbe.csiro.au
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 00:19:26 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jeff Wheeler <jwheeler@BIGCAT.MISSOURI.EDU>
Subject:      CSOUND
 
Hey,
Anyone out there know how to get ahold of CSOUND and what system
requirements there are for said program?
 
Ciao fo now.
Jeff
 
       ______________________________________________________________
      | Jeffrey K. Wheeler                       |                   |
      | jwheeler@bigcat missouri.edu             |        JKW        |
      |                                          |    VirtualMusic   |
      | 3600 E. Hidden Lane                      |         &         |
      | Hartsburg, Missouri  65039-9774   U.S.A. |       Sound       |
       --------------------------------------------------------------
          "I only know that through music you can reach to God"
                                                    Ali Akbar Khan
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 01:26:09 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Keith Bowers <KaBowers@AOL.COM>
Subject:      60 Fathoms deep and gale winds (deep structures 2)
 
Boy, I said I was wading out in deep water with my post about deep structures
and their relative obscurity in Schoenbergian systems.
 
But Im glad some others have found interest in the crashing waves-
 
Mark Simon posted while humming retrograde inversions of the row in Moses und
Aaron-
 
>It may be that at some core level
>there's some sort of universal emotional response to certain musical
>phenomenon, but after that the bulk of it is cultural. Music expresses
>what we decide it expresses.
 
Well said.
The "content" that music structures convey are what I refer to as
"complexity". Music exists as a medium to apprehend complexity in ourselves.
This may seem nebulous but outside of the happy/sad endless circle debate,
the possibility of recognition of complexity  is a function of our  relation
to music.
 
Directly put music is a mirror which we use to reflect ourselves.
 
Studies that examine the physiological effects of auditory wave phenomena
suggest that music can be tailored to elicit a response in humans.
Stockhausen makes much of this in his writtings "Towards a Cosmic Music".
 
 
More storm warnings from the coast-
 
Dr. K corey posted while rehearsing the fire dept brass band-
 
 >Of course, if you simply accept that no music has any
>emotional *content*, you won't have to suffer disappointment that a search
>for such content comes up empty.
 
The Ancient Greeks recognized the inheirent capabilities of music to affect
the human organism both physical and mental. Maybe potential in music would
be a better word than the big bad "E" word you reject.
 
Dr Corey also wrote while berating the tuba player in his best Toscanini
voice-
 
  >I'd be interested in seeing anyone
>demonstrate that emotion is a thing that can be contained by anything,
>even people.
 
People do not "contain" emotion we exist it. We dont say " I contain
happiness" we say "I AM happy"
 
Experiencing grief, love, anger -these are not easily explained however these
"states" are our mode of exisitng.
 
Boy the water is getting even deeper out here.
 
Anyone want to talk velocity # fixes for DX-7 controllers using Emagics
Notator Logic?
 
Turning the boat towards shore-
 
kabowers@aol.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 00:32:21 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Patrick Lenneau <ptl@CRL.COM>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
>On OCT 4 Keith Bowers wrote:
>
> I remember well Michael Gielen being chased from his music directors post in
>Cincinnati during the 80's for programing what was, in the orchestra's view,
>too many 2nd V. school works. This was actually a revolt on the part of
>professional orchestra musicians who would presumably have an advanced
>understanding of musical syntax. If Schoenberg and his followers works were
>so self referntial that even professional musicians could not or would not be
>able to make the links that make a work transcend being a historical
>curiosity what is to be expected from the general concert going public?
 
  I think the operative words here are "professional orchestra musicians."
 Making these links is what artists do. If not with the music of Schoenberg...,
 where are these professional orchestra musicians making these links? Perhaps
 with one hundred and two hundred year old works.
 
  Professional musicians are not neccessarily artists, perhaps craftsmen, but we
 can be sure that their "professional" selves will serve as a weathervane for
 what the consumer wants. I would not put much faith in the motivations of these
 "professional musicians."
    _____________________________________________________________________
  _/_____________________________________________________________________\_
 / |                                                                     | \
 | | And In This Corner:                                                 | |
<| | Originally from Alameda, CA fighting out of ptl@crl.com             | |>
 | | The Cyberweight Champion of the World... Patrick "AltoHorn" Lenneau | |
 \_|_____________________________________________________________________|_/
   \_____________________________________________________________________/
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 02:04:05 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Patrick Lenneau <ptl@CRL.COM>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
On 5 Oct 94 Mark Simon wrote:
 
>Atonal music may be said to be "self-referential" in that it rejects all
>the consonance/dissonance-based expectations of the audience, which as I
>said before, makes up a very large bulk of what we've come to consider
>emotional. In the 12-tone system, tonal and intervalic relations are
>determined by the row chosen by the composer, rather than from the
>collective memory bank of the audience. Schoenberg himself used the
>phrase "12 tones related only to each other".
 
  The tone rows may not explicitly refer to consonance and dissonance in a
 harmonic context but they do in a modal context. A modal resolution is usually
 just a few tones away. This provides a shifting modal context which is only
 realized after the resolution occurs.
 
>So if atonal music appears to lack emotion it's because we haven't come
>up with a conventional way to respond to it. Perhaps we never will.
>There's no law that says we have to. If audiences want to stay away from
>atonal music, there ain't nothin' that's gonna stop 'em.
 
  This is a common response to new music. I have heard be-bop jazz described as
 out of tune by those with limited exposure to it. Apparently the shifting
 tonics combined with extensive chord extensions evokes this response. It seems
 that tone rows might be having a similar effect on the listener but without the
 reinforcement of the repeated structures found a be-bop tune. Hence there is no
 out of tune, there is just nothing.
 
>There are other conventions that I haven't mentioned which deal with
>rhythm and melodic/motivic repetition. Most, perhaps all of the atonal
>music that I like makes generous use of these conventions.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 04:31:52 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Shawn T. Rutledge" <rutledge@ENUXSA.EAS.ASU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  <01HHX3QAIUK49BVE81@asu.edu> from "atomic city" at Oct 5,
              94 01:22:08 pm
 
> In conclusion, I would say that in order to reproduce this sort of
> behavior in humans, one would have to generate whatever sound is
> believed to work at very high volumes, and that at this time there is
> no direct evidence that any particular sound wave has a general effect
> on human beings when played at moderate levels (treating the Huxley
> story and my experience as statistical flukes). For those who want to
> experiment on their own, I suggest a lot of bass energy, the largest
> subwoofers available, suitable ear protection for all concerned, and a
> keen sense of the ridiculous.
 
Indeed.  Well, I heard somewhere that certain low freqs can cause a bowel
movement.  If it worked on enough people I guess it could be marketable.
Imagine having a high-powered subwoofer next to the john for those
constipated moments....  :-)
 
--
  _______                KB7PWD - now on packet!      shawn.rutledge@asu.edu
 (_  | |_)               html: http://enuxsa.eas.asu.edu/~rutledge/home.html
 __) | | \__________________________________________________________________
* sci fi * RISC * fusion * robotics * PIC * quantize the universe * packet *
   *** Happy Birthday to the Internet!  May it live long and prosper. ***
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 08:22:13 LCL
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Michael Carnes <mc@LEXICON.COM>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <9410060435.AA10919@ursa-major.spdcc.com>
 
----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: text
X-Sun-Data-Description: text
X-Sun-Data-Name: text
X-Sun-Content-Lines: 9
X-Sun-Content-Length: 707
 
While I'm not surprised to see the amount of traffic my orgasm story
produced, I am surprised how many people missed the point of it. Yes,
there are lots of barely-supported studies that purport to show some
physiological responses to various frequencies.  No they have no musical
application.  I was trying to point out the old chestnut 'A little
knowledge is a dangerous thing'.  My bass-player friend was demonstrating
an all-too-common scientific misunderstanding that most people display
when hearing a media report on some obscure paper.  If the way you put
your notes together doesn't attract people to you, then you better be
good-looking because a 7Hz oscillator is just not going to do it for you.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 09:01:26 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Bob Ceely <NEC_CEELY@FLO.ORG>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
Actually I think you got in in retrograde: i.e. most science types want to
be musicians  but threy can't hear a perfect fifth never mind a
 anything more complicated than I VI ii V   I    The reason so many people
want to get off this list is because of the inane discussions like these about
Milton Babbitt and Arnold Schoenberg. Go build your nerve gas and stop it!
Love,
RPC
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 09:22:19 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Louis Pape <PAPEL@COLUMBIA.DSU.EDU>
Organization: Dakota State University
Subject:      Re: Finale help on the Net?
 
Someone may have already informed you, but there is a listserv only
for FINALE available and there is a lot of help and message on it.
It is     Finale@SHSU.edu
 
In the body of your message state only     subscribe FINALE
 
 
Usually you do NOT need to include your e mail address as it is
picked up automatically.    Best wishes.  LP
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 10:16:33 +662900
Reply-To:     "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@HEINOUS.ISCA.UIOWA.EDU>
Organization: Heinous Owners Club And Persons With Nine Letter Names
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <199410060646.BAA05496.198A7@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
 
On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Mark G Simon wrote:
 
> Doesn't matter who chose the title. If the shoe fits, wear it. "Who cares
> if you listen" perfectly describes the contents of his famous article,
> protest all he may. When the NY Phil played his "Relata I" and union
> regulations forbade the taping of the performance, he was upset (as any
> composer would be), but for that the stated reason that the real people
> he intended the music for [i.e. his fellow profs] wouldn't get to hear it
> while people who didn't matter [i.e. the general public] would. Clearly
> the only ones he cares about hearing his music are his fellow academics.
> Sorry, that's not good enough for me.
 
Fine.  If you can point out passages in the article that merit the title,
I'm willing to listen.  But I've met people who "think" they understand
the article, without ever having read it.  I don't see the attitude in the
article, so I'd really like it if someone -- anyone -- could make it clear
to me.  This can be done via private email, and I'll be happy to
summarize, if anyone's interested.
 
> In my opinion the best audience for music, paradoxically perhaps, are
> scientists. And I mean real scientists, not wannabes like Babbitt. Go to
> any physics or chemistry department and you'll find a whole slew of
> people who sing or play instruments quite proficiently. They also show up
> faithfully at the local concerts. These are intelligent people, and they
> enjoy music and listen intelligently. They applaud Bach and Brahms, and
> if they want something more contemporary they'll put on Brian Eno. They
> won't listen to Milton Babbitt or Anton Webern or Brian Ferneyhough. They
> deal with dry calculations all day in their work. Why should they have it
> in their music.
 
Babbitt's not a wannabe scientist, period.  Wannabe scientists are people
who quote 5 minutes' knowledge of the overtone series as evidence for the
supremacy of common practice harmony, ignoring the fact that any *real*
scientist or mathematician would never, ever confuse 3:2 with an equally
tempered fifth, not in a million years.
 
If anyone was a wannabe scientist, it was Hindemith.  However, that's
never interfered with my enjoyment of his music, so I don't worry about
it.
 
As a matter of logic, it simply doesn't follow that dry calculations
result in dry music.  It's quite possible to develop a very dry algorithm
to produce any bit pattern on any CD.  *All* music can be reduced to dry
calculations.  It can also be done with mostly-dry-but-somewhat-damp
calculations, in a class called Theory I.
 
> OK this is generalizing. Scientists are as individual as anybody else,
> but the point is, it's not a choice between pandering to the dunderheads
> who scream at Jesus Jones concerts or licking the butts of egg-headed
> professors. There are intelligent listeners out there who have concluded
> that orchestras, string quartets, opera, the whole works are irrelevant
> bullshit because they only do dead composers, or modern composers who
> sound worse than dead. They're turning away from "classical" music
> altogether. We can't just say "fuck em all, what do they know" or "75
> years from now I'll be as famous as Beethoven". Hell, 75 years from now
> there'll be no more orcestras to play your mighty masterworks, or
> Schoenberg's, or Mozart's or anyone else's. It is absolutely essential
> for the survival of the art that we "serious" composers cultivate a
> sizable audience of whatever intelligent people there are outside of the
> "new music" community, in fact outside of the music community altogether.
> No, we don't have to be able to fill monster stadium concerts like the
> rock groups do, but this small tiny tiny minority of a minority "new
> music" community is entirely too "self-referential".
 
Yes, but there are also intelligent listeners who have reached opposite
conclusions from these, Mark.  There's even such a thing as intelligent
people who call themselves "Republicans" and intelligent people who call
themselves "Democrats", and the fact that one group is intelligent does
not automagically make the other group un-intelligent.  Therefore, the
fact that your conclusions are shared by intelligent people does not by
itself make these conclusions accurate.
 
Kronos plays Hendrix, and plenty of rock bands use orchestras onstage with
them.  I agree with you that this is a time for composers to do plenty of
rethinking about what we do, but to say that orchestras are bullshit
because Beethoven is dead seems analogous to saying books are bullshit
because Aristotle is dead.  Heck, we could say that electronic music is
dead because Georg Ohm and Ben Franklin are dead.  It just don't follow
logically.
 
> > > If they don't, you may still win your Pulitzer Prize. You may even have a
> > > better chance of winning it if they don't. But ultimately your music is
> > > dead as Lenin if people won't listen to it and enjoy it. That's just the
> > > way it is.
> >
> > Yup.  But as long as one single person in the audience has a clue
> > concerning what I'm saying, my music is as alive as Lennon's.  :)
>
> I presume that one person is your mother.
 
Bad presumption.  My mother wants me to write waltzes.  Even my wife
doesn't always know what I'm talking about, even though she, too, is a
(dreaded) academic composer.
 
> Mark Simon
> mgs2@cornell.edu
 
At this point, I think I should add something new to the discussion.  I
haven't written anything even remotely serial in over 10 years.  Frankly,
the notion that anyone still thinks that *pitch* is an issue in music
disturbs me.  Pitch hasn't been relevant to music since Russolo or Pierre
Henry [Wow!  I'm talking about *emusic* again!] so far as I'm concerned.
 
But, I will defend *any* music -- and particularly music that I care about
-- against inaccurate facts and arguments constructed with faulty logic.
Sure, plenty of people think serial music is irrelevant.  Plenty of people
also think Jean-Michel Jarre is irrelevant.  Plenty of people think the
indigenous music of <insert name of third world country here> is
irrelevant.  But none of this proves anything, really.
 
If folks are tired of this thread, send me private email, please, and I'll
be happy to drop the whole matter.  Fan mail is welcome, too.  ;-)
 
-- Kirk
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dr. Kirk Corey                 [insert       Electronic Systems Administrator
kirk-corey@uiowa.edu          disclaimer                      School of Music
                                here]                  The University of Iowa
    "Msdos?  MSDOS? I've seen CALCULATORS with a better operating system!"
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 10:24:00 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Peter Mueller <Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Finale help on the Net?
 
Does anyone know of an Internet source(s) where one can find help with the
Mac version of Finale? Any format will do (gopher, ftp, telnet, etc.).
Drop me a line...thanks in advance.
 
kmartin457
     Try subscribing to the Finale list.
     Contact Listserv@SHSU.edu
     message should say
     SUBSCRIBE FINALE
 
>-- Saved internet headers (useful for debugging)
>Received: from AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU by ucsd.edu; id SAA01236 sendmail 8.6.9/UCSD-2
>Message-Id: <199410060105.SAA01236@ucsd.edu>
>Received: from AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU by AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)   with
>Received: from AMERICAN.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@AUVM) by AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU (LM
>Date:         Wed, 5 Oct 1994 18:04:12 -0700
>Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
>Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
>From: Karen Anne Martin <45650@EF.GC.MARICOPA.EDU>
>Subject:      Finale help on the Net?
>Comments: To: EMUSIC-L@auvm.bitnet
>To: Multiple recipients of list EMUSIC-L <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
>X-CCaddr: Bcc: peter mueller AT ucsdlibrary
>X-CCaddr: *To: EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU at @UCSD
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 14:33:36 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
>
> Babbitt's not a wannabe scientist, period.  Wannabe scientists are people
 
Well he's sure not a composer either.
 
> who quote 5 minutes' knowledge of the overtone series as evidence for the
> supremacy of common practice harmony, ignoring the fact that any *real*
> scientist or mathematician would never, ever confuse 3:2 with an equally
> tempered fifth, not in a million years.
 
I don't know who you're talking about here. It sure wasn't me. The point
you make about 3:2 not being the same as a tempered 5th only supports the
actual point that I was arguing in my other posting, which is that
expression in music is mostly culture-derived. Obviously if we can accept
a tempered 5th as consonant we're not following the dictates of nature.
 
I'm not about to argue the supremacy of common practice harmony. There's
too many other possiblities. Schoenberg offered one such other
possibility, but it still hasn't caught on outside of academia, even
after 80 years.
 
>
> Yes, but there are also intelligent listeners who have reached opposite
> conclusions from these, Mark.  There's even such a thing as intelligent
 
And they're killing music. Absolutely killing it.
 
>
> Kronos plays Hendrix, and plenty of rock bands use orchestras onstage with
> them.  I agree with you that this is a time for composers to do plenty of
> rethinking about what we do, but to say that orchestras are bullshit
> because Beethoven is dead seems analogous to saying books are bullshit
> because Aristotle is dead.  Heck, we could say that electronic music is
> dead because Georg Ohm and Ben Franklin are dead.  It just don't follow
> logically.
 
Again, you're arguing with someone else here, not me. I agree with the
above paragraph you've written, but many others say the orchestra is
dead. What are you going to do about it? Sit there and write for one
audience member while 1000 others walk out in disgust? This thread is
going quite lively on the orchestra list. You should sign up and follow
it there. I'll have no more to say about it here.
 
>
> At this point, I think I should add something new to the discussion.  I
> haven't written anything even remotely serial in over 10 years.  Frankly,
> the notion that anyone still thinks that *pitch* is an issue in music
> disturbs me.  Pitch hasn't been relevant to music since Russolo or Pierre
> Henry [Wow!  I'm talking about *emusic* again!] so far as I'm concerned.
 
or Ice T or Public Enemy. Okay, ... if that's what you want to listen to,
you go right ahead.
 
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 15:37:49 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Harry F.P. Haecker" <haeckerh@OSPREY.NWRC.GOV>
Subject:      deep structure in obscura
 
Would it be OK if I ask a sincere question here?  If not, you can tell me
to blow and I'll just be a voyeur to this thread.
 
>Pitch hasn't been relevant to music since Russolo or Pierre > Henry [Wow!
>I'm talking about *emusic* again!] so far as I'm concerned.
 
In your opinion, what aspect of sound _has_ become relevant to music in
these last days of this millenium?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've
gathered that timbre and complex polyrhythms utilized within
computer-generated algorithms is popular among some of the intelligencia on
this list.  Is this the case within larger circles?
 
Harry Haecker (haeckerh@nwrc.gov)
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:42:47 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nate Waddoups <natew@HALCYON.COM>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <199410061248.AA11028@halcyon.com>
 
On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, Michael Carnes wrote:
 
> While I'm not surprised to see the amount of traffic my orgasm story
> produced, I am surprised how many people missed the point of it.
 
Don't worry, I don't think any took it too seriously...
 
> Yes, there are lots of barely-supported studies that purport to show some
> physiological responses to various frequencies.  No they have no musical
> application.  I was trying to point out the old chestnut 'A little
> knowledge is a dangerous thing'.  My bass-player friend was demonstrating
> an all-too-common scientific misunderstanding that most people display
> when hearing a media report on some obscure paper.  If the way you put
> your notes together doesn't attract people to you, then you better be
> good-looking because a 7Hz oscillator is just not going to do it for you.
 
I don't think anyone on this list seriously thinks that this is the key
to their entry into the music biz, but you know what?  I laughed out loud
at some of the messages in this thread.
 
It may not be relevant to electronic MUSIC, but I see nothing wrong with
a little noise in the signal, if it's this funny...
 
+-------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
| natew@halcyon.com | You write Windows code?  Mac code?  OS/2 PM code?
+-------------------+ Want a great job in the pacific northwest?
                      Send me email, we'll talk...
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 13:52:25 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         jk <JKRIKAWA@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU>
Subject:      Binaural phenomena (was deep stuff)
 
From: Nate Waddoups <natew@HALCYON.COM>
>I've read a thing or two about sending different low frequencies into
>each ear - supposedly, the subject's brain waves fall into synch with the
>difference between the two frequencies, and meditative states can be
>induced this way.  Interesting idea.
Indeed, a binaural phenomenon.  There was a Scientific American
article of many years ago which described binaural excitation.  As
we all know if you mix two signals (lets say 440Hz and 443Hz) and
listen, you'll hear tone beating.....e.g. the same beating you hear when
you're trying to tune a guitar.  Well, that's not so cool....big
deal!  It becomes of interest when you send a different frequency
tone into each ear, as Nate describes.  In this case, providing you
have ideal isolation (like an in-the-ear headset), it is the *brain*
that 'hears' the beating.  The beating does not occur in the air as it
would from stereo speakers.  It is a construct based on neural
stimulation.
 
Driving brain waves with this beating has been described, but I'm
not sure if a large sample size trial has been done using quantitative
EEG or brain mapping.  (John 3: have you heard of such a trial?)
 
It is relatively easy to program an experimental tone(s) on a synth
provided you are sure that signal paths of the tones do not cross
electronically.
 
                                                      _
-john       ___                                    __/ |
___        |   |     JKrikawa@CCIT.Arizona.Edu    |    |___      ________
   \______/     \__________ Tucson, AZ ___../\./\/         \____/        \____
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 22:25:06 GMT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         rob de groot <rdegroot@KNOWARE.NL>
Subject:      TASCAM DA 88
 
I am using the Tascam DA 88 now for almost one year and must say this is a
perfect machine to work with. At the moment we use the machine locked with
the Sony P2 protocol  with our Sony BVE 910 video edit controller. It
synchronises perfect and I can use the edit controller as remote control as
well.  During this year NO PROBLEMS AT ALL. (no drop-outs or other kind of
tape/transport/sound/mechanical problems).
 
Don't worry about the DA88's  multiplexed tracks.  When you record onto
track 1, the machine reads and re-writes track 2 at the same time. I never
experienced the sound being influenced by this action. (On the hard disk of
your computer you do the same thing with the files you need every day. Ever
lost any data?  Only if deleted by accident or on purpose. The DA 88 is
fast in winding and rewinding but tape transport proved to be very
reliable.  The choice for the DA 88 (instead of the ADAT )was also decided
on the experience we have in video with 8mm and super-vhs tapes.
 
 
Rob de Groot
-----------------------------------------------------------
* VIDISHOT AudioVisual Productions & Facilities
* Heeswijkplein 19
* NL-2531 HC The Hague
* The Netherlands
* EMAIL: rdegroot@knoware.nl
* Tel.  +31-70-3940563
* Fax  +31-70-3935387
-----------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 14:09:00 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Peter Mueller <Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
Would it be OK if I ask a sincere question here?  If not, you can tell me
to blow and I'll just be a voyeur to this thread.
 
>Pitch hasn't been relevant to music since Russolo or Pierre > Henry [Wow!
>I'm talking about *emusic* again!] so far as I'm concerned.
 
In your opinion, what aspect of sound _has_ become relevant to music in
these last days of this millenium?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've
gathered that timbre and complex polyrhythms utilized within
computer-generated algorithms is popular among some of the intelligencia on
this list.  Is this the case within larger circles?
     I'm not sure. But I was told (by Vinko Globokar) that studies have
     shown that the order of cognition of musical elements is 1)dynamics,
     2)rhythm, 3)timbre, 4)pitch. Any psychologists or psychoaccousticians
     out there want to comment. I don't know this from anything other than
     word of mouth, but I figure since Vinko studied this stuff, I'll trust
     him until someone else convinces me otherwise.
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 20:13:41 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Ryan C. Jones" <R0adkillj@AOL.COM>
Subject:      unsubscribe
 
    would somebody please unsubscribe me? i've tried multiple times to do it
via the addresses it said to, but my mail gets returned. if somebody can
unsubscribe me, or if they know how, please do so or let me know.
 
thanks
                                                           r0adkill
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 18:50:37 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Shawn T. Rutledge" <rutledge@ENUXSA.EAS.ASU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
In-Reply-To:  <01HHYII5HZSM9BVEZG@asu.edu> from "Nate Waddoups" at Oct 6,
              94 01:42:47 pm
 
> +-------------------+-------------------------------------------------------
> | natew@halcyon.com | You write Windows code?  Mac code?  OS/2 PM code?
> +-------------------+ Want a great job in the pacific northwest?
>                       Send me email, we'll talk...
 
OK, here it is...
 
Well, I'm actually an electrical engineering student, and will be graduating
this December, but a software position would certainly be OK.  Sometimes I
think I ought to have been a CS major anyway :-).  My experience has mostly
been with plain old C, but I really want to learn some Windows programming.
I have done some Toolbook, and some reading, with the goal of being able
to write several applications I have in mind, so it's not completely foreign
to me.  You can find my resume by going to my home page (listed in the
signature below)... Go to "information about the author" at the bottom,
and then "Personal Resume".  I do love the Pacific Northwest (is it
Oregon by any chance?) and want to get a job away from here if possible -
explore someplace different, and hopefully get some less hot weather out
of the deal.
 
So, what can you tell me about the positions available?
 
--
  _______                KB7PWD - now on packet!      shawn.rutledge@asu.edu
 (_  | |_)               html: http://enuxsa.eas.asu.edu/~rutledge/home.html
 __) | | \__________________________________________________________________
* IEEE * alternative energy * electronics * ham radio * techno * Star Trek *
   *** Happy Birthday to the Internet!  May it live long and prosper. ***
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 21:22:54 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Tom Jordan <Wired4Soun@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
>>story I heard was that a certain frequecy caused
you bladder to let go if exposed constantly to it for
about seven minutes.
 
I also remember hearing a story about chopper pilots wearing diapers for
their low frequency "attacks" in Vietnam. There were supposedly sounds
blasted to the ground below by speakers (subaudio) mounted on the helicopters
to cause the enemy to loose control of their bowels. That's all I know about
it.
 
Tom Jordan
wired4soun@aol.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Thu, 6 Oct 1994 21:23:00 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Tom Jordan <Wired4Soun@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: deep structure in obscura
 
>>On 5 Oct 94 Mark Simon wrote:
 
>Atonal music may be said to be "self-referential" in that it rejects all
>the consonance/dissonance-based expectations of the audiencex
 
>>This is a common response to new music. I have heard be-bop jazz described
as
 out of tune by those with limited exposure to it.<<<
 
I'm reminded of a concert by Weather Report I attended several years back. It
was obvious to me that the solos were *continuations* of "conversations" that
had been going on for weeks of gigs on the road. I felt left out.
 
Unfortunately (at least for me!) the performers had not bothered to include
me. They had failed to reach out to me, to take me along, bring me into the
dialog. Anyone, any style of composer, is capable of opting to preclude the
listener. "What's your agenda?"
 
Tom Jordan
wired4soun@aol.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 09:36:05 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Geert De Paep <gdepaep@BE.ORACLE.COM>
Subject:      Q: Cubase Lite? Or other Score-software
 
Tel:      (02) 719 12 52
Email:    gdepaep@be.oracle.com
 
Hello,
 
A Question? I heard that Cubase exists in three versions: Cubase Lite, Cubase
Scores and Cubase Audio. Can anyone tell me whether Cubase Lite is freeware or
do you have to pay for it? And if so, how much does it cost? (I find Cubase
Scores rather expensive) I have the program Cubase-demo, which is free. Is
Cubase Lite very different from this?
Does anybody know what other music-annotation programs there exist that are
either free or either do not cost too much? I just want to be able to record
the music I play (on a keyboard) into some program that shows me the scores,
and that does some basic operations on this, like e.g. quantisation, editing,
.... Just what Cubase-demo does, however I would also like to be able to save
my results in a file on disk (what Cubase-demo unfortunately does not allow).
Any suggestions for this? Or locations where soft is available?
 
Thanks,
Geert.
gdepaep@be.oracle.com
 
    _____ _____ ______ ____ __   _____     Geert De Paep
     __ /  _  /  __  / ___/  /    ___/     Oracle Belgium
    /  /  /__/  /_  / /     /    __/       Excelsiorlaan 28
  ____/__/ _|__/ __/____/ ____/____/       1930 Zaventem, Belgium
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 11:30:29 GMT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Lion Keezer <lionkzr@KNOWARE.NL>
Subject:      Re: Books on songwriting
 
>I'm interested in finding books on practical songwriting (in
>particular, in the areas of rock and film scores).  Book resources in
>NZ range from vague to non-existent.
>
>A local music store told me about a series of books published by Mix
>Bookshelf.  The salesman from this store had bought a couple while
>he was in New Orleans, but he hasn't been able to track down an agent
>for NZ.
>
>So my two questions are:
>
>1.  Has anyone heard of Mix Bookshelf, and how can I contact them.
>
>2.  Can anyone recommend other publications that handle songwriting
>techniques, in a practical fashion.
>
>Thanks for any help.
>================================================
>Craig Jewiss, CNE         Systems Engineer
>National Library of New Zealand
>ph: 64 4 4743072
 
 
Graig,  (and everyone else interested)
 
Try 'The Billboard Book of Songwriting',  by Peter Pickow and Amy Appleby.
published by Bilboard publications, Inc.  New York.  It was first printed
in 1988
and the ISBN is 0-8230-7539-7.
 
If found it most useful
 
Lion Keezer
Amsterdam, Holland
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 10:36:20 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Tom Zougas <zougas@BURST.CIV.UTORONTO.CA>
Subject:      Re: Finale help on the Net?
In-Reply-To:  <199410070554.BAA20344@burst.civ.utoronto.ca>
 
On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, jk wrote:
> Subscribe to EMUSIC-L
>
> send a message to IN%"LISTSERV@AMERICAN.EDU"
> in the body put SUB EMUSIC-L your name
>
> UNSUBSCRIBE TO EMUSIC-L!!!:
>
> send a message to IN%"LISTSERV@AMERICAN.EDU"
> in the body put SIGNOFF EMUSIC-L your name
 
just to clarify things, the address should be:
 
listserv@american.edu
 
not:
 
in%"listserv@american.edu"
 
 ==========================================================================
Tom Zougas                                           zougas@civ.utoronto.ca
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 09:57:01 +662900
Reply-To:     "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Dr. Kirk Corey" <kcorey@HEINOUS.ISCA.UIOWA.EDU>
Organization: Heinous Owners Club And Persons With Nine Letter Names
Subject:      To pitch or not to pitch (was: deep structure in obscura)
In-Reply-To:  <199410062043.PAA07420.198A7@heinous.isca.uiowa.edu>
 
On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, Harry F.P. Haecker wrote:
 
> >Pitch hasn't been relevant to music since Russolo or Pierre > Henry [Wow!
> >I'm talking about *emusic* again!] so far as I'm concerned.
>
> In your opinion, what aspect of sound _has_ become relevant to music in
> these last days of this millenium?  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've
> gathered that timbre and complex polyrhythms utilized within
> computer-generated algorithms is popular among some of the intelligencia on
> this list.  Is this the case within larger circles?
 
Counting myself as one of the "intelligencia", yes, I think that many
people currently working in computer music are interested in timbre and
complex polyrhythms.  But I think plenty of folks outside of the
"intelligencia" would like to get their hands on a new Morpheus (the synth
that lets you "morph" from one timbre to another).
 
A couple of months ago, Philip Blackburn, of the Minnesota Composers'
Forum, played for me some music he had recorded on a recent trip to
Vietnam.  My impression of that music was that the people who made it were
also concerned much more with timbre and rhythm than with pitch.  From
the perspective of timbre and rhythm, it's interesting to note this
relative proximity of some computer music and some "ethno" music, compared
to the 19th century symphonic repertoire.
 
In any case, interest in things besides pitch seems to exist in larger
circles, which is what Harry was wondering.
 
Of course, I've probably been grinding my axe with the "traditional"
four-semester theory sequence of 101: Pitch, 102: More Pitch, 103:
Advanced Pitchology and 104: Pitch Revisited for about as long as some of
my distinguished colleagues have been chanting "Schoenberg and Webern and
Berg, oh my!"* :)
 
*Chanted to the rhythm of "Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!" from The
Wizard of Oz.
 
-- Kirk
 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Dr. Kirk Corey                 [insert       Electronic Systems Administrator
kirk-corey@uiowa.edu          disclaimer                      School of Music
                                here]                  The University of Iowa
    "Msdos?  MSDOS? I've seen CALCULATORS with a better operating system!"
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 11:56:29 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark G Simon <mgs2@CRUX3.CIT.CORNELL.EDU>
Subject:      Memories of Xenakis: Bohor I
 
> >
> >Xenakis is another story, to be honest i don't know how much attention he
> >pays to tonality, other than it is neither traditional nor twelve tone.
>
> Well, i wish I knew more about his work; I've heard a live performance of
> his percussion piece for the SiXXen, and have heard (once) the Nonesuch
> recording of Bohor I, arguably the first recorded piece of industrial
> noisepainthrashmusic.
 
Oh yeah, I forgot about Bohor I. I bought that record when I was 17 and I
haven't listened to it in ages. I'll have to dig it out. As I recall, it
sounds like thousands of trash cans banging by at 100 miles an hour with
some kind of low hum in the background. It goes on for about 20 minutes
and intensifies until the last 5 minutes are one tremendous WHOOSH. It
ends with a very abrupt cutoff.
 
I thought this was pretty cool stuff back in 1971. Especially the time my
father barged in the room screaming "TAKE THAT THING OFF THIS SECOND!!!".
He was about to rip the needle off the turntable, but just as his hand
reached down to do the deed the abrupt cutoff came. He jerked his hand
back, even more startled. For the teenager who wishes to annoy his
parents, you can hardly go wrong with Xenakis.
 
Of course my official position on Xenakis today is that he's one of those
@#&%!!!! academics. I still occasionally get some surreptitious pleasure
from this stuff every once in a while, though. Xenakis is extremely
mathematically oriented but he does manage to come up with some striking
sounds, if you enjoy sounds for their own sake.
 
I have a feeling my wife is going to have the same reaction to Bohor I as
my father did. Such is life. Ah well, there's always headphones.
 
Mark Simon
mgs2@cornell.edu
 
I reserve the right to hold as many contradictory viewpoints as I please.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 10:59:11 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Macalester College Music Department <FORNER@MACALSTR.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Memories of Xenakis: Bohor I
In-Reply-To:  Your message dated "Fri,
              07 Oct 1994 11:56:29 -0400" <01HHZQNLETS2AFWF91@MACALSTR.EDU>
 
Mark (and others)
 
re Xenakis, have you ploughed through his book "Formalized Music, Thought and
Mathematics in Composition". IU Press, 1971. This was supposed to delineate the
compositional process which was to become the "common practice" of the future.
Now with almost 25 years hindsight, it seems to me that the book was prophetic.
Even if you should disagree with it as a general application, it is an
important insight into X's own music and should you not be familiar with it, I
sincerely hope you enjoy the read!
 
cheers!
 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
+ Ed Forner                         Macalester College Music Department +
+ in%"forner@macalstr.edu"          voice (612) 696-6189                +
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 09:18:15 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Michael A. Dalton ADP OPuS" <miked@PLAZA.DS.ADP.COM>
Subject:      Re: Books on songwriting
In-Reply-To:  <9410071021.AA08092@plaza.ds.adp.com> from "Lion Keezer" at Oct 7,
              94 11:30:29 am
 
> >
> >1.  Has anyone heard of Mix Bookshelf, and how can I contact them.
> >
 
Mix Bookshelf
800-233-9604
 
6400 Hollis Street #12
Emeryville, CA  94608 U.S.A.
 
 
 
--
+------------------------+-------------------------------+    __/\__
| Michael A. Dalton      |"What I say to you, I say to   |    \/  \/  "Never
| miked@plaza.ds.adp.com | everyone: Watch!" -Mark 13:17 |    /\  /\   Again!"
+------------------------+-------------------------------+    ""\/""
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 11:51:38 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mark Douglas Nelson <NELSONM@WABASH.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Memories of Xenakis: Bohor I
In-Reply-To:  <01HHZQNYNELE000E91@WABASH.EDU>
 
On Fri, 7 Oct 1994, Mark G Simon wrote:
 
> Of course my official position on Xenakis today is that he's one of those
> @#&%!!!! academics. I still occasionally get some surreptitious pleasure
> from this stuff every once in a while, though. Xenakis is extremely
> mathematically oriented but he does manage to come up with some striking
> sounds, if you enjoy sounds for their own sake.
>
 
Try Xenakis' composition for percussion, Pleiades, recently released on a
BIS CD.  Might make one revise one's notion of Xenakis-as-academic.
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 11:40:42 CDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         HARRY HAECKER <BTHAEC@LSUVM.SNCC.LSU.EDU>
Subject:      To pitch or not to pitch
 
Yes, even though I'm not the proud owner of either a music degree or a
brand-spankin'-new Morpheus, I'm also interested in (as Eno puts it)
the "vertical aspect of sound". I'm considering a MicroWave, however...
I take it that the two synths are comparable?  I'm exploring accessable
polyrhythms, as opposed to those that are so complex as to be impossible
to readily be viscerally understood outside of a mathematical expression.
 
Since all sounds are made up of a fundamental and its accompanying overtones,
you're saying that exploring the relationships between fundamentals is passe,
while exploring the relationships between partials is rave.  If so, I can
understand why: traditional major/minor/12 tone can go just so far in
opening up the universe of sound.  There is just SO MUCH out there to
experience that hasn't been tried; but that brings up another, ancillary
dilemma that I've been pondering (I'm sure it's been discussed in the
Halls of Music Academia, but I wasn't there that day ;-)  )
 
Although you think that our system of tuning and tonal relationships has
been beaten into the ground, I think there is still a place for I-IV-V-I
(some might say that place is the nearest landfill!), and people will be
listening to these songs much more readily than, say, Xenakis, for the next
100 years...
 
"You stole my heart, my achy-breaky heart...":)
 
Many of these songs will just re-hash the old ones (most?), but that's
just the point: people like comfort, and the old I-VI-IV-V-V6/4-I
is like putting on your favorite pair of loafers.  That brings me to
my impression of the real importance of "Pitch 101, 102, etc."
 
I think in this day of new, new, new, we are in danger of moving too
fast with new explorations; perhaps moving on before fully exploring
what we have.  We're being inundated by 1000's of algorithms for compostion,
and before being able to REALLY study them as individual phenomenon, we
move on.  It's like the exact opposite of the problem you describe for
our scale system that's been in use for the last 300 years.
 
I _know_ the music of a culture can serve to bind it together,
and like language, if we each spoke an inaccessable tongue, an important
storehouse of common ground would be lost.  Those Vietnamese songs of
which you spoke are a good example of this.  I'm not an ethnomusicologist,
but I would hazard a guess that there hasn't been much change in their
music for hundreds of years, and that stability helps bind together their
culture in a very strong manner.
 
I do have the utmost respect for "the intelligencia" and the Halls of
Music Academia: I hope one day to count myself among them.  However,
there seems to be a moat being built that separates modern/future music
theory from John Doe in, say, Denham Springs, LA.  If there is to be
mutual respect, so that cutting edge music theories are in common use
by and for the public (thereby preserving the fabric of our culture), we've
got to bridge that gap somehow.
 
Question: How did the system now in use get to be used by the European public
3 centuries ago?
 
Harry Haecker (bthaec@lsuvm.bitnet)
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 18:35:24 CET
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jacek Latanowicz <JACK%PLPUAM11.BITNET@SEGATE.SUNET.SE>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
In-Reply-To:  Message of Wed,
              5 Oct 1994 10:31:42 MST from <thare@SIRIUS.WR.USGS.GOV>
 
 Hello.
 
Well, since I'm studying acoustics, I just couldn't keep my mouth shut.
I think that some of You have the point about these low frequencies.
But in general :
You have to divide scale of frequencies to -sounds (percepted by human ear)
                                           -ultra sounds (higher)
                                           -infra sounds (lower)
And also there is a great importance in difference beetwen sounds and
vibrations.
The definition of sound is based on propagation of wave in the air, and
vibration of propagation in some other states.
Human body is made up of resonators, reacting to different VIBRATIONS
for instance < 2 Hz the whole body vibrates together
               6 Hz is the resonant frequency of lung muscle
              etc etc etc....(for different parts of body)
             .... 600 Hz is the resonant of an eye.
But reacting to sounds propagated in air is different and more complicated.
There must be a lot more of enegry in the wave to change the field from
air to some solid material, or BODY.
So speaking of direct influence that SOUND makes it is barely noticable.
There is also a psychological view on sound. There is also a story
that few japanese people worked in a lab where was a FAN emitting non
hearable tone of 300Hz. They all ended up in a psycho-hospital.
So there are many types of influence. The chickens died probably from
both influences. The factory made freq. that shook their brains and damaged
them and maybe their neural system broke down...who knows ?
The Japanese guys got an psychological influence directed into neural system
for sure, and not directly by vibrations.
But there are also millions of examples how directly a tone can resonate
on Your body and things surronding it. Like - 'why do soldiers crossing the
bridge have an order to walk freely and not harmonically.' ? - because
once a bridge was destroyed due to resonant frequecy they generated.
 
Btw, a typical amplifier can transmit freqs from 1Hz to 200000Hz. The problem
is in speakers which usually have limited range from 18-18000Hz or adding
some piezos to a ultra range lets say 40000Hz. But woofers propagating
waves in the air can't generate SOUND below 20 or 18 Hz. They will shake,
move but no sound can be heard...it's just a VIBRATION, and air can catch
up with it so NO SOUND IS GENERATED. Just visual movements.
 
Thats my 2 cents.
 
Jacek L.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacek Latanowicz   tel/fax Pl-(0-48-61) 798-202
Ul.Porzeczkowa 27  jack@vm.amu.edu.pl   smile@vm.amu.edu.pl
61-306 Poznan      jlat@plearn.edu.pl   jlat@uci1.ae.poz.edu.pl
POLAND                    "'Dream on, dream on, dream on baby...' CoX"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 13:35:26 CST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Darwin Grosse <ddg@DEVLAC.EMS.COM>
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
>Human body is made up of resonators, reacting to different VIBRATIONS
>for instance < 2 Hz the whole body vibrates together
>               6 Hz is the resonant frequency of lung muscle
>              etc etc etc....(for different parts of body)
>             .... 600 Hz is the resonant of an eye.
 
Well, from my personal experience...
 
re:2 Hz   - My own whole body hasn't vibrated together since I was in high
            school - the downside of a desk job...
 
re:6 Hz   - Assumes a standard chest cavity - Darwin's barrel doesn't count!
 
re:600 Hz - Obviously the frequency I used during my one shot at uWave
            programming.  Or, at least, it was the resonance of the salesman's
            eyes...
 
Getting a tad real, I think that the cause of various stages of distress based
on frequencies produced has to be more Psych than Physics.  This would also
explain the differences in _my_ reaction to Guns & Roses vs. teeny-bopper's.
 
Or maybe not.  Since I'm twice the size of a standard teeny-bopper, perhaps
I should feel twice the reaction :->
 
[ddg]
..............................................................................
  Darwin Grosse  .    (414) 377-2946(h)/359-9800(w)    .  ddg@devlac.ems.com
..............................................................................
 
My two cents are obviously economically challenged ...
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 14:18:35 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         MR ROBERT POKLENKOWSKI <NYWK35A@PRODIGY.COM>
Subject:      H.H.'s 'To Pitch, or not To Pitch"
 
H.H.- You present a very valid point when you say, and I'm paraphrasing;
"There is still room for I IV V I."
 
Indeed, there is.  However, one must consider what is done, in most current
(read Popular) circles, with the much maligned I IV V I progression.
Perhaps I should have said "...what is NOT done with the I IV V I."
 
Most of the popular music that I have heard, and I say most-not all, seems
to treat standard harmonies as if they are the very be all, and end all of
the composition.  Most seem to treat these battered chords as if that is
all that there is.  (Perhaps "all they know" would be more appropriate.)
 
Which brings me back to my original point; There is indeed room for I IV V
I ; but, I think that it depends on whether these chords are treated with
craftsmanship, or as the latest unimportant underlying progression in a
piece that seems to exist only for the distortion effect.
 
Robert Poklenkowski
NYWK35A@prodigy.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 17:21:14 GT+3
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Hermann Henning Rauth <RLAT1@RLA01.PUCPR.BR>
Organization: PUC/PR
Subject:      Re: frequency orgasms
 
> Never finished the test though.  If anyone wants to
> try I can dig up the fequency.
>
>                                         thare
 
Well, Thare, give us some of yer wisdom, tell us more about this
"magical frequency"...
 
                                        Falcon
                                        rlat1@rlat1.pucpr.br
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 17:25:14 GT+3
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Hermann Henning Rauth <RLAT1@RLA01.PUCPR.BR>
Organization: PUC/PR
Subject:      Re: resonant frequency
 
> of much LESS significance is the fact that while quietly humming to myself
> in a stall in the men's room, i discovered that the resonant frequency
> of the stall was roughly the 2nd G below middle C.  i found that no
> matter how quietly i hummed the G the volume in the stall was the same.
> i could go up a step and there was no resonance; all i heard was me.
 
I just can't believe !!! I discovered that too!!! Here in Brazil the
men's room are also 2nd-G-bellow-middle-C-ressonant!!! That's
fantastic!!!
 
HHRauth
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 13:33:54 EDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "william.b.fox" <wbf@ALOFT.ATT.COM>
Subject:      Re: sorry...guitar player again
 
Tom Ritchford said:
> I have no problems with discussions of guitar effects... I got a bit
> distressed to see long discussions of guitar *chords* though...
 
(Sense of humor and/or asbestos suit on.)
Please tell me which chords are _guitar_ chords so I can avoid them
during my sequencing sessions.
(Sense of humor and/or asbestos suit off.)
 
Bill Fox        wbf@aloft.att.com
 
P. S.  I'm a guitar player who plays bass in a Progressive Rock band,
keyboards in my MIDI studio, and saxophone in a community concert band.
Go figure!
=========================================================================
Date:         Fri, 7 Oct 1994 19:30:58 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "L Mccoy (GD 1999)" <mcco5@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
Subject:      Xenakis
 
The comments about Xenakis's music on this list have been thoroughly
intriguing.  I was fortunate enough to utilize some of his sketches for a
masters thesis at Maryland back in 93, and am reading a paper on his
MISTS on Nov.6 at the SMT conference in Tallahassee.  This is a shameless
plug.
 
There is another edition of "Formalized Music" out (I believe in 1991 or 92)
that updates many of the theories he discussed in the first edition.  His
insights on granular synthesis, forecasted in the 50's, have proven to be
invaluable to composers today.  Xenakis is now working (at age 72) at
CEMAMu in Paris.  Incidentally, Boulez is still at IRCAM, I believe. I
have always found it interesting that both of these composers, as
students of Messiaen, went in such opposite directions!  May I suggest a
recording of X's chamber music by the Arditti String Quartet.  They are
absolutely phenomenal players!
 
As for the many instances of phobia of academia that have made their way
onto the list, I would ask only acceptance of the academics.  There have
been many wonderful contributions by both those closely associated with
the University and those who remain adamantly outside.  True, there are
professors, etc., who operate on fear, just as there are 'outsiders'.
I would suggest that, in our century when the questions about music start
dealing more with the 'how' than with the 'what', we might engage in
accepting 'analysis' and deterministic composition as additional ways of
experiencing music.
 
It is only through fear that music can be 'killed'.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 15 Oct 1994 01:31:56 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Ron Jones <DJDreams@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: seq software for pc
 
Mabey so but you get waht you pay for becieds why would want to learn
somthing substandard then have to learn all over.
Get Calkwalk For Windows or Qbase
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 15 Oct 1994 09:23:33 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Emily Gene Park Kottkamp <mle@GLADSTONE.UOREGON.EDU>
Subject:      want to learn about it
 
So, uh, hi there! I am an electronic musician (piano/synth player)
interested in getting involved in this forum. Since I'm as green as
spring when it comes to the Internet, I may make a few mistakes along the
way (I hope this isn't one of them!) How can I subscribe? and, what will
I be subscribing to if I do? Finally, has anyone seen/touched/heard about
the new Kurzweil PC88mx digital piano controller? I'm about ready to buy
it (sight unseen; we don't get much e controller. I'm about to buy it
(sight unseen) and could really use a little nudge in the right direction
right now. Thanks much! Hope this dadburn newfangled contraption works...
 
                                                Matt
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 15 Oct 1994 14:36:13 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Philip Bednarski <TedPhil@AOL.COM>
Subject:      Re: please sign me off
 
please sign me off your distribution list.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 15 Oct 1994 16:35:32 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "L Mccoy (GD 1999)" <mcco5@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>
 
Mark S
 
 
 
Wow.  You continue to make the case against academia in a wonderfully
inane manner.  You seem to believe that there's this great big nasty
institution out there, with no regard for what you call the 'real' stuff
of music is all about.
 
Your comments are simply recursive and uninformed.  If one can't use
discretion when some goofball goes off on a screed about pitch, then I
believe this is a sign that one has stopped thinking for himself.
 
As for dealing with the 'who' (and yes, I understand we're not talking
about Pete Townshend) exactly 'who' are you talking about?  Is it the
'guess who'?  How do you want to communicate with them?  Are you trying
to make sure they "dig it man, oh yeah, i get it, oh yes, i understand man'
Unfolding the secrets of humanity in some way?  Seems to me, Mark, that
you're interested in attempting to objectify the aesthetic experience.
 
Well, the comments regarding the analogy between sex and experiencing
music are quite hilarious.  Would one have as dry a time after the Kama
Sutra?  All I ask for is acceptance of other ways of experiencing music,
including analysis.  And you, the great speaker for humanism (I suppose)
due to some pain in the past with oral boards or what have you, have
decided that it all must go!!!
 
Your screeds against foundationalism are simply advocations for
re-foundationalism.  I suggest reading a little on Nancarrow to see how
he dealt with this.  Please re-examine your statements.  Please
understand that what you are advocating is what you seem to be
complaining about, only in a different flavor.  Phrases like "then that
would be okay", that qualify when and how analysis SHOULD or OUGHT to be
done sound just as dry and crackled as anything amongst the ivy.
 
In short, your arguments simply contradict themselves.  And your
irrationality and problems in dealing with what you would like to call
the 'musical elite' are just the familiar ramblings of a person who,
deigning to live on the outside, live and like to be offended in some way.
 
 
Yet, we need this as well.  I believe it would be good for us to be more
accepting of different experiences.  You believe only a few should be
accepted.  We disagree on this point, and others, I would assume.  But I
believe it is a good kind of disagreement.  Perhaps a good exercise would
be to take your basic vocabulary of qualifying words like 'good' and
'bad' and then sit down to a sheet of paper, draw a straight line down
the middle, label one side OBJECTIVE and the other SUBJECTIVE and see
what happens.  My guess is that the words you use, like 'boredom', will
most likely pile up under the latter.  Cheers.
 
 
mcco5@minerva.cis.yale.edu
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 15 Oct 1994 21:44:16 CET
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jacek Latanowicz <JACK@PLPUAM11.BITNET>
 
Hello.
 
I would like to excuse subscribers for last week's mess. My account was
disabled without a warning and messages from the list were bounced back.
I don't know how many did get back on the list but if they did I'm very
sorry.
  I didn't mean to make such mess. I was acused locally of hacking the
system. I didn't do such thing and it took a week to give me back my
account.
 
Jacek L.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jacek Latanowicz   tel/fax Pl-(0-48-61) 798-202
Ul.Porzeczkowa 27  jack@vm.amu.edu.pl   jlat@uci1.ae.poz.edu.pl
61-306 Poznan      jlat@plearn.edu.pl     (Jack1 on IRC)
POLAND                "'I wish I had a dream...'"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 9 Oct 1994 23:05:29 -0300
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         ADRIANO PIETA <PIETA@VORTEX.UFRGS.BR>
Subject:      03R/W
 
Hi to you all!
      could anyone give me some info on changing the A/G banks on the 03R/W
through cakewalk. 90% of the sounds I use are from bank A, but when I load
the song within cakewalk, all the sounds are turned into bank G.
      what are the real differences between 03R/w and 05R/w?
thanx in advance!
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 16 Oct 1994 09:12:09 GMT+1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         jackie <j.freeman@QUT.EDU.AU>
Organization: QUT Library
Subject:      Guitar sounds
 
G'day,
 
I'm new to this list - so I hope my question is not out of place
here. ;)
 
Could some recommend a synth or sampler that has particularly good
guitar sounds, and/or violin sounds?
 
 
thanks in advance :)
 
 
 
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                    _______________________________
                    | | || | | | || || | | | || | |
                    | |_||_| | |_||_||_| | |_||_| |
                    |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
                    |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|
 
"In anything at all, perfection is finally attained not when there is
no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to
take away."
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
=========================================================================
Date:         Sat, 15 Oct 1994 16:40:48 PDT
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Comments:     Environmental Systems Research Institute
From:         Tapas Das <tdas@ESRI.COM>
Subject:      Re: Guitar sounds
 
I would highly recommend the EMU Proteus FX rack mount unit.
It has a good collection of acoustic/electric guitar samples.
This is a very cost effective unit.  Sweetwater sells them for $559.
It comes with 512 sounds and 32 note polyphony and built in effects.
 
However, you should go to a music store and check out the following gear
before you decide.
 
Rack mounts:
Roland SC88
Roland JV1080
Yamaha TG500
Korg O1R/W
Korg Wavestation SR - has a fabulous lead guitar patch.
 
Keyboards:
Roland JV90 with orchestral expansion board
Korg O1/W Pro
 
You should also consider samplers from EMU and Akai and definitely
the venerable K2000RS and check out the magnificent samples from
the ProSonus CD library.
 
No matter what you play with, any guitar or violin sample can be sonically
enhanced once you pass it through an Ensoniq DP4 judiciously applying the
proper effect chain.  My personal favorite is the Sony M7 chorus module
in conjuntion with the awesome Sony R7 stereo reverb.  You can also try
out the new Lexicon PCM80.
 
All of the above will give you a killer sound. Your specific requirements
and your ears should dictate what your buy.
 
Tapas Das.
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 16 Oct 1994 09:48:04 GMT+1000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         jackie <j.freeman@QUT.EDU.AU>
Organization: QUT Library
Subject:      Re: Guitar sounds
 
Tapas,
 
Wow! Thanks so much for your thoughtful and detailed message. I'll
definately look into the items you recommended.
 
I'm an ex-keys player who sold everything to go study, but now I
would like to get back into it again. Is the EMU proteus related to
the Emax keyboard......I had one of those in my last band *snif* :( !!
 
 
thanks again Tapas
 
 
regards
 
Jack
 
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                    _______________________________
                    | | || | | | || || | | | || | |
                    | |_||_| | |_||_||_| | |_||_| |
                    |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
                    |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|
 
"In anything at all, perfection is finally attained not when there is
no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to
take away."
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
=========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 16 Oct 1994 01:21:51 +0000
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Jim Gardner <jim@KIOSK.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:      Welsh????
 
>A Welsh composer who is considered to be the central figure of the
>     "new complexity". He is currently living and teaching in San Diego.
>     Check him, he's great.
 
No No No.  Ferneyhough was born in Coventry. He's English.
 
Jim
==========================================================================
Date:         Sun, 16 Oct 1994 19:57:36 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Nick Rothwell <nick@CASSIEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Which Mac to buy  (I'm a moderate, really, I am!)
 
> Obsynth: why do you never get long tedious nerdy flamewars about
>which synth is the "best"?  :-)
 
How long have you been on this list? :-)
 
 
    Nick Rothwell     CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance     nick@cassiel.com
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 13:13:26 +0900
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Suzuki Takahiko <takahiko@SHOTGUN.PHYS.CST.NIHON-U.AC.JP>
Subject:      Gibson Lab's MAX
 
Hi,
Does any one know about Gibson Labs MAX(not IRCAM's MAX)?  It is Guitar to MIDI
 signal converter. I'm looking for MAX for long time,but I've never seen it.
If someone has info,please let me know.Any info is appreciate.
 
Thanks,
Takahiko Suzuki
 
ps   Please send e-mail directly to me at
 takahiko@shotgun.phys.cst.nihon-u.ac.jp
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 15:53:04 +0800
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Mon-chu Chen <u8342514@CC.NCTU.EDU.TW>
Subject:      E-music graduate school....
In-Reply-To:  <9408081543.AA24511@cc.nctu.edu.tw> from "E. Candy Held" at Aug 8,
              94 11:39:17 am
 
Dear Netters,
 
     I would like to know graduation requirements for master degree
in computer/electronic music of any school.  Could you please give me
some information?
 
Thank you.
 
Chen, Mon-chu
u8342514@cc.nctu.edu.tw
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 10:02:21 BST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Philip Jones <p.jones01@IC.AC.UK>
 
Hi All,
 
I am researching into the MIDI protocol and wondered if anybody
could answer a few of my questions? I only have MIDI spec 1.0
which does not cover a lot of available MIDI functions.
 
1) Are Systems byte 0xf1, 0xf4 and 0xf5 still undefined?
 
2) Are real time bytes, 0xf9 and 0xfd still undefined?
 
3) How are new timecode systems implemented?
 
4) What is the format for MIDI sample dumps. i.e. what codes
   do they use and what is their specification?
 
5) What other new developments and assumed standards have been
   implemented since MIDI spec 1.0 in 1983?
 
6) How can I contact the International MIDI Association (IMA)
   either with Email or if that is not possible by ordinary
   post (preferably a UK address)?
 
If anyone could help me with any or all of these questions I
would greatly appreciate it if you could Email me.
 
Thanks
 
Phil Jones (pj02@ee.ic.ac.uk)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 10:14:39 BST
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Philip Jones <p.jones01@IC.AC.UK>
 
Hi All,
 
I would be very interested if anyone knows of, or has had any
experience with a MIDI generating, organ pedal board. This
request is for a friend who is an organist/guitarist and
wants to combine the two simultaneously!!
 
I have never come across such a device but maybe one
exists. I am not after a 'MIDI pedal' but a complete pedal board,
i.e. one and a half octaves of large foot operated pedals set
out as for a keyboard. They need to be able to generate simple
MIDI off/on or just have their own integral sound source.
 
If anyone has heard of such a device (slightly bizarre) I would
be greatful for further info.
 
Thanks.
 
Phil Jones (pj02@ee.ic.ac.uk)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 09:01:49 LCL
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Michael Carnes <mc@LEXICON.COM>
Subject:      Re: Guitar sounds
In-Reply-To:  <9410152312.AA07094@ursa-major.spdcc.com>
 
----------
X-Sun-Data-Type: text
X-Sun-Data-Description: text
X-Sun-Data-Name: text
X-Sun-Content-Lines: 13
X-Sun-Content-Length: 825
 
It's fairly easy to get a good guitar sound (leave out the subject of
playing technique for a while) on any sampler or sample-based synth. Since
the guitar note dies away naturally, the programmer doesn't have to worry
that much about looping and saving memory.  The guitar sounds on my K2000
are pretty good and you can also get more samples off the net or from
CD-roms etc.
 
Now for the fiddle, that's a different story.  I don't think anybody's
factory fiddles are particularly good.  Besides, string instruments are
so flexible that there really isn't a single defining sound.  You're going
to need samples of all sorts of bowing, molto-vibrato, senza vibrato, etc.
For that a good sampler with lots of memory is required.  Then you'll have
to spend a lot of time nosing around for the particular sort of sounds you
need.
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 10:00:59 -0400
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         "Holly Boundy (508) 682-1727" <boundy@MVLC.LIB.MA.US>
Subject:      Korg 01/W FD question
 
Does anyone know how to set the MIDI mode from the default (Mode 3, Omni
Off/Poly) to Mode 1 (Omni On/Poly)? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
 
Thanks,
 
H.Turner (hboundy@mvlc.lib.ma.us)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 10:54:37 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Joe McMahon <xrjdm@FARSIDE.GSFC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      Re: seq software for pc
 
>Mabey so but you get waht you pay for becieds why would want to learn
>somthing substandard then have to learn all over.
 
Speaking from personal experience, economic reasons can be a powerful
motivator to look at less-expensive options. I agree that yes, when I
finally upgrade to using a computer instead of my VFXsd's internal
sequencer that I will have to relearn my sequencing habits, but that's not
a big deal.
 
 --- Joe M.
 
--
"At the end of the hour, we'll have information on the sedatives used by
the artists,,," (MST3K)
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 14:07:58 +0100
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         Stefan Scheffler <stefan@MMS-GMBH.DE>
Subject:      Re: Ears and beers (was: Sex and Academia?)
 
>So where can one learn a little (or alot) more about this "Wavelet
>Analysis" theory?  I took a Psychology of Perception class last semester,
>and this was barely alluded to...Are there any Universities working on
>research in this area right now?
>
>intrigued-
>
>-thad
The Wavelet Analysis is a very new research area. Though it is one with
lots of activities.  At my last publication retrieval I found 1.500 entries
in one data base.
 
It started a few years ago with some thought from a geophysic guy, who
needed something for measuring the reflections of waves seismograhic inside
the earth. That idea was adopted by the mathematics.
 
The today existing applications include data compression (audio/video), and
some frequency analysis. Yesterday I read in a magazine that the FBI use a
wavelet based compression for storing fingerprints. JPEG wasn't good enough
for their purposes.
 
After getting deeper into it, the last days. I am not too sure what
musical/acoustical aspects it can fulfill beside the compression. I hope to
get faster applications for audio analysis/synthesis, the fourier based
ones are just too slow.
 
Ciao,
  Stefan
 
<> stefan@mms-gmbh.de
<> Stefan Scheffler, Software Development
<> Steinberg Soft- & Hardware GmbH
<> Cubase Lite/Score/Audio for Mac/Atari/Windows
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 08:30:44 -0700
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         atomic city <atomic@NETCOM.COM>
Subject:      Re: your mail
In-Reply-To:  <199410170917.CAA09197@mail.netcom.com> from "Philip Jones" at
              Oct 17, 94 10:14:39 am
 
Philip Jones writes--
>
>Hi All,
>
>I would be very interested if anyone knows of, or has had any
>experience with a MIDI generating, organ pedal board. This
>request is for a friend who is an organist/guitarist and
>wants to combine the two simultaneously!!
>
>I have never come across such a device but maybe one
>exists. I am not after a 'MIDI pedal' but a complete pedal board,
>i.e. one and a half octaves of large foot operated pedals set
>out as for a keyboard. They need to be able to generate simple
>MIDI off/on or just have their own integral sound source.
>
>If anyone has heard of such a device (slightly bizarre) I would
>be greatful for further info.
 
If you insist upon an octave and a half, you may have problems;
most MIDI pedalboards are only an octave. Korg made one, and Roland
has made one or two in its history (including, I think, one still on
the market today, which may be 1-1/2 octaves, but I can't be sure).
Most are controllers for external synths. If you must have 1-1/2
octaves, look for a Moog Taurus II pedalboard minus the synth, and
use its CV and S-trigger outs to run to a CV-to-MIDI converter. I
played with one of these rigged to an Oberheim Xpander for a while;
it made for a nice adjunct to my bass guitar playing.
 
--
      mike metlay |
      atomic city | The Mrs., on some ugly grandfather clocks:
    p.o.box 81175 |
pgh pa 15217-0675 | "Wow. Ticky-tacky that's ticky AND tacky."
atomic@netcom.com |
=========================================================================
Date:         Mon, 17 Oct 1994 11:56:31 -0500
Reply-To:     Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
Sender:       Electronic Music Discussion List <EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU>
From:         BIGGERSTAFF THAD LEWIS <thad@FALCON.CC.UKANS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Guitar sounds
In-Reply-To:  <01HIBD4E3J1E9EHBQ7@KUHUB.CC.UKANS.EDU>
 
On Sat, 15 Oct 1994, Tapas Das wrote:
 
> I would highly recommend the EMU Proteus FX rack mount unit.
> It has a good collection of acoustic/electric guitar samples.
> This is a very cost effective unit.  Sweetwater sells them for $559.
> It comes with 512 sounds and 32 note polyphony and built in effects.
>
> However, you should go to a music store and check out the following gear
> before you decide.
>
> Rack mounts:
> Roland SC88
> Roland JV1080
> Yamaha TG500
> Korg O1R/W
> Korg Wavestation SR - has a fabulous lead guitar patch.
>
> Keyboards:
> Roland JV90 with orchestral expansion board
> Korg O1/W Pro
>
> You should also consider samplers from EMU and Akai and definitely
> the venerable K2000RS and check out the magnificent samples from
> the ProSonus CD library.
>
> No matter what you play with, any guitar or violin sample can be sonically
> enhanced once you pas