========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 22:27:42 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mark Bostel Subject: Re: computer composit > > The "green" key (isn't it G major?) could symbolize > > the GO command. Though the key of B sounds like "silver" > > and may be useful to symbolize betrayal for money: i.e. the > > thirty-nine pieces of silver which tempted Judas to > > deliver Christ to the Romans. > >i don't know about green, wagner uses Ab in Parsifal and says the opera >is the color green.. G is usually used for mothering, birth, feminine >nurturing > >b minor is usually used for double crossing B major more for sexual ecstasy > >as to the rest, I will answer you privately when I have some time to sit >and consider everything. so far all I see on a superficial scanning of >your material is a static situation, you have ideas about motives >for respresenting certain fixed thoughts, ideas or actions, but not >reason for those motives to interact and develop into anything. > >more later, sounds like a powerful image, but a little static. > >mt > I'm sort of enjoying this thread. BUT. I've never found b minor THAT exciting -- hands up who does. As for the rest, it all sounds a bit silly ( I was going to say wankey, but someone might have been offended). Deepest sympathies, MarkB. PS. my uneducated 2 cents worth is that wagner was an egotist who believed that his intellectual real estate was vast enough to be worthy of the sort of research that his work seems to have attracted. When his stuff is good it appeals to everyone, regardless of musical education, but for the most part it is boring. His jungian leitmotivs are little more than zimmer frames for supporting a frail musical structure. On the other hand, I wish I had his skill. Everyone has their weaknesses. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 23:47:46 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mark Bostel Subject: Re: The crack opera >> >>May I ask you this... >>Given: >>Five addicts sitting around a make-shift "coffee" table. >>The former door to the bathroom comprises the table's top. >>The glass pipe, an actual character in the libretto named >>"Scottie," stands at the center of the table top. >> >>The pipe is empty. The addicts collectively must face >>both their jones and the reality of having to go out on >>the street and compromise their selves in various capacities >>in order to aquire more crack. >> >>Holding up the table top are two boom boxes: each tuned to >>the same station. Scotty begins to sing to the ears of the >>addicts. Telling them he needs to be refilled. >> > > >> >>How can the music symbolize the plot if there is not >>much action in the dramatic plot? > >Now here's where you need to study Wagner, who specialized in plot without >action. Wagner would have created a "Scotty" motive and a "crack" motive. >The motives would have been constructed to combine contrapuntally, and each >motive would sound incomplete without the other. There would be another >leitmotiv for the great hero who would redeem Mankind by bringing in the >Sacred Substance. There would be another leitmotiv for the Woman whose love >caused the Hero to renounce his desire to smoke all the crack himself. There >would be yet another leitmotiv for the police officer who busts the hero >just as he's about to return with the Sacred Crack [end of Act I]. > >The title would be "The Dawn of Crack" (Die Crackerdammerung) > .. and it doesn't take a genius to work out what the crack is a leimotiv for. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 10:26:03 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mark simon Subject: Hi, Scott Long time no flame, Scott. I felt like bashing your head just for old times sake, but I couldn't find anything in this post to disagree with. >Although the choice of form is significant for a composer, it is just as >significant a choice for a listener. And these may not match. At all. > >What intrigues me about this discussion of form is the various ways in >which it is defined. It is possible to view it as a bucket to be filled >with musical materials that, when stirred around and mixed in the right >proportion, result in (poof!) a sonata. I would say any composer, even when writing a sonata, who doesn't let the materials dictate the form is going to produce some pretty artificial-sounding stuff. Beethoven never wrote pre-fab sonatas, why should we? ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Mark G. Simon mgs2@cornell.edu ////////////////////////////// Question stupidity /////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 16:23:12 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: The crack opera > without action. Wagner would have created a "Scotty" motive and a "crack" > motive> The motives would have been constructed to combine contrapuntally, > and each motive would sound incomplete without the other. There would be > another leitmotiv for the great hero who would redeem Mankind by bringing in the Sacred Substance. There would be another leitmotiv for the Woman > whose love caused the Hero to renounce his desire to smoke all the crack > himself. There would be yet another leitmotiv for the police officer who busts the hero just as he's about to return with the Sacred Crack [end of Act I]. The title would be "The Dawn of Crack" (Die Crackerdammerung) droll.... music is best at emphasizing psychological action as opposed to physical action. the complexity of musical structure is the perfect analog for the tremendous amount of mental activity that goes into even our smallest seemingly most insignificant gestures. It is a mistake to state that wagner is devoid of action, one can almost taste the psychological energy in act I of walkure as siegmund and sieglinde fall in love with each other while just sitting around and staring. the effect is much more powerful and meaningful than any amount of running around and "doing". many have experienced just such a situation where words alone are incapable of capturing the tremendous and powerful surge of feelings. perhaps some such similar evolution is going in the minds of the characters in your crack drama????? if you could articulate the accelerated and desperate evolution of thought characteristic of an addict justifying his next series of lies/crimes/whatever in order to realize his greatest good (Ab) which is ultimately his betrayal (b minor) you might have something. coincidentally, while B major stands for the great mysteries of life (the spiritual aspects of sex and death) g# minor (the bridge between Ab major and B major) stands for the will of heaven utilized in a literal sense which usually yields negative results - e.g. Agamemnon's sacrifice of his daughter iphigenia in order to win the trojan war (ultimately though getting murdered at the hands of his wife). it is interesting the keys of Ab and B were mentioned since they do reflect the ideals of the characters, even if they are in a perverted reference frame. mt ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 16:36:55 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: computer composit > I'm sort of enjoying this thread. BUT. I've never found b minor THAT > exciting -- hands up who does. As for the rest, it all sounds a bit > silly ( How about Bach? the mass in b minor? the flute sonata in b minor? the 24th fuge in WTC I? how about Klingsor, or Hagen, or the Curse in the Ring? These are among the most powerful characters, works, sections, etc.... b minor is the key of spiritual transformation through violent action. > PS. my uneducated 2 cents worth is that ... as long as we are all clear on that... > His jungian leitmotivs are little more than zimmer frames for > supporting a frail musical structure. On the other hand, I wish I > had his skill. Everyone has their weaknesses. his leitmotivs are the least interesting part of his work. his use of form and his profound understanding of tonality fare transcend anything in his motives. a quick example: the fate motive, a d minor chord followed by a V7 chord in f# minor (C#, E#, G#, B). this is one of the most solemn moments in all of music when Brunnhilde comes out to announce to Siegmund his impending doom: a moment when human consciousness breaks through a window to communicate with divinity. the motive demonstrates this by juxtaposing two chords which are not subsumable into any key period. D minor and C# as a V7 cannot exist in any predefined context, thus the symbolism of something from outside the possible world view of d minor (which happens to be siegmund's key). secondly, the chord based on C# is enharmonic to Db, the key of valhalla but here shown in its "brightest" possible as something that shines down upon mere mortals. the influence of the B added to the chord is twofold: 1) b is the element of spiritual transformation - just exactly what brunnhilde is about to do to siegmund 2) b changes the tonality of the C# chord to f# minor, the key of "turning away from" in a downward direction, thus we already know from the first two chords exactly what is going to happen in the scene. as it progresses siegmund rejects the empty pleasures of valhalla and argues so passionately that he convinces brunnhilde to reject them also. the tonalities of the entire scene evolve in just this fashion. all of wagner is overflowing with examples like this. if you who don't understand wagner, don't understand german and can't grasp a form which may take 60 or 70 minutes to unfold you don't need to like it, but please refrain from making such irresponsible uninformed generalizations. some people do read these echoes in order to learn, and such statements are misleading. mt ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 14:11:00 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: More Wagner (skip if not interested) In-Reply-To: from "clive@PELICAN.DBE.CSIRO.AU" at Oct 10, 95 10:31:10 am clive@PELICAN.DBE.CSIRO.AU writes-- >> >>My sincere apologies to emusic people for taking up so much bandwidth on a >>subject that really belongs on another liszt. >> >No need to apologise to me, at least. The concepts discussed in this >series of threads are as relevant to emusic as they are to other musical >forms. It is a pleasure to hear them so clearly articulated. Keep it up >guys: I suspect we are all Brothers in Brahms. I would agree that this thread is eminently worthwhile, but I'm starting to resent being Beethoven the head with these puns, so Bach off. mike -- choose your friends carefully-- your enemies will choose themselves for you ========================================================================== Mike Metlay ~ ATOMIC CITY ~ P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com = http://pd.net/atomic-city = All of our CDs can now be ordered directly from our WWW site, or by calling INFINITE ILLUSIONS: vox 904-385-6463 or 1-800-548-6724, or FAX 904-668-5825 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 16:42:26 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Hi, scott > I would say any composer, even when writing a sonata, who doesn't let the > materials dictate the form is going to produce some pretty > artificial-sounding stuff. Beethoven never wrote pre-fab sonatas, > why should we? first of all this is untrue, beethoven wrote many prefab sonatas. even more prefab is mozart. the answer as to why is that the more rigid the form the more powerful the significance of any given moment which you no must occur and which is therefore more susceptible to meaningful manipulation. mt ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 22:05:11 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mark Bostel Subject: Re: computer composit >... b minor is the key of spiritual transformation >through violent action. > ... >if you who don't understand wagner, don't understand german >and can't grasp a form which may take 60 or 70 minutes to unfold you don't >need to like it, but please refrain from making such irresponsible >uninformed generalizations. some people do read these echoes in order to >learn, and such statements are misleading. > >mt > I apologise. I thought later last night that I'd been a little flippant. However, I do find remarks like your above reference to b minor more than a little difficult to swallow. Sure, music can occasionally evoke common emotional responses but the repertoire is very limited. If Wagner means to generate specific responses such as 'remorse' or 'pleasure in another's unhappiness' or somesuch then it must be in context with non-musical elements ocurring at the same time. To suggest that there is language inherent to the musical form, which you appear to accept, and that this language can convey complex ideas such as 'spiritual transformation' is surely naive. Gurdjieff, who I have some respect for, believed as you appear to suggest in your subtext, that music is capable of generating objective results in the listener, and further believed that this was the highest objective of the artist. And Jung believed in alien spaceships. Regards, MarkB ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 20:36:23 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Todd Eric Moore Subject: Re: Screw Wagner Please no more Wagner. I've had it with you filling my mailbox with too many 'Valker-cries'. Wagner was a good composer, but not the best that the Germans had too offer. Maybe if he had listened to Nietzsche more often he might have gotten somewhere. However, this list is for the discussion of Electronic Music... Music that is alive today and being created today on instruments of today. Thank you very much. Let the flames commence. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 09:11:22 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mark simon Subject: Translation please I think we can continue to discuss the issue of form as long as we steer clear of Wagner can't we? I think Scott was trying steer the discussion in the direction of differentiating betwteen form that is imposed from without as opposed to form that arises from within. I promise I'll make no snide remarks should he care to expand on the topic. I think I agree with what he was trying to say. I'm sorry, but I have not yet successfully decoded this sentence: >the answer as to why is that the more rigid the form the more powerful the >significance of any given moment which you no must occur and which is therefore >more susceptible to meaningful manipulation. Marshall, I think weI need an Ubersetzung, bitte. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Mark G. Simon mgs2@cornell.edu \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 08:01:38 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: computer composit > emotional responses but the repertoire is very limited. If Wagner means to > generate specific responses such as 'remorse' or 'pleasure in another's > unhappiness' or somesuch then it must be in context with non-musical > elements ocurring at the same time. To suggest that there is language > inherent to the musical form, which you appear to accept, and that this > language can convey complex ideas such as 'spiritual transformation' > is surely naive. except for the fact that there is a long tradition of this stuff going back to the greeks (the concept of ethos in music) for a history of this stuff in tonal music you can look at rita steblin's book "a history of key characteristics in the 18th and 19th centuries" which includes listings by numerous composers and theorists on the significance of keys. references are also made in jorgensen's book on tuning. furthermore, one finds consistently from zarlino (1500's) through leonard bernstein that certain keys are associated with certain actions in music drama or criticism. one cannot argue with the written historical evidence. recently an article appeared in a newspaper which demonstrated that at basketball games (!) whenever an airball is thrown the entire crowd chants "air ball" on the two notes f-d. this was demonstrated by by videotaping several games from around the country and testing the crowd. d minor happens to be the key of the hero who's desires have been frustrated (for example siegmund in walkure). historically this stuff probably arose due to asymmetries in the system of tuning, since historical tunings correlate 100% with the implications. the physiology of hearing demonstrates that every note is received at a specific point in the ear and analyzed by a specific nerve. thus there are also physiological reasons to understand that each note can be distinguished at some level and retain its own set of associations. therefore i submit to you belief in this is not naive, but highly informed. mt ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 07:48:17 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: Prophecy In-Reply-To: from "Nick Rothwell" at Sep 16, 95 11:08:47 pm Well, after transcribing Website references, clearing off admin stuff, and so forth, including jettisoning every message I could avoid answering even if I wanted to (up to the point of "Oh this is just too good to let by!"), I'm now onlyabout twenty messages behind. So let's get started, shall we? :) Nick Rothwell writes-- > >Think of this as an EMUSIC-L topic rather than a SYNTH-L one: > >Proposition: for a musician wanting just one synthesiser, the Prophecy >would be ideal. Hmmm. Please qualify your terms. Just one synthesizer, as in just one synthesizer to place in a studio with other, non-electronic musical instruments, or just one musical instrument? My answer will be slightly different, depending.... There is a lot of appeal to the former position, but a great deal of that is my 1970's mindset, when a keyboardist went out with a piano, an organ, a string ensemble, and a monophonic synthesizer. The Prophecy has a lot going for it: relatively low price, timbral flexibility, a large palette of tools for molding the sound in real time (I admit to a particular interest in the rolling-log-and-ribbon, being an old fan of both the Hugh LeCaine Electronic Sackbut and the Yamaha X4500's wrist-mounted pitch and mod rollers), and the implicit mental focus of a single voice to play with (in some sense, polyphony makes things difficult). If you're talking about a SYNTHESIZER versus a WORKSTATION, as some have made the distinction, then the Prop may well be the ideal machine. However, when we go to the idea of a single musical instrument, it gets tougher in some sense to justify the Prop, unless the user is extremely patient. We're now talking about multitracking to build up a sonic landscape; this is possible, and in fact some of the better albums were made this way in the good old days (Synergy's "Electronic Realizations" is almost all Minimoog). But it's not easy, and I wonder how much discipline to put a record together this way would be present in a modern musician, used to the relatively instant gratification of MIDI and huge polyphony in workstations. This, of course, skirts the issue of whether the features the Prop DOES have are as good as some folks say they are... the initial reports have been phenomenal, because the most enthusiastic users and the earliest posters here tend to have a selfselecting overlap. But on other mailing lists, people whose opinions I understand and trust have raised serious doubts about the sound of the machine and its user interface for actual programming as opposed to realtime playing. So we may be discussing the concept of the Prophecy as a monophonic, moldable instrument to an extent, rather than a less pristine reality.... Comments? mike -- choose your friends carefully-- your enemies will choose themselves for you ========================================================================== Mike Metlay ~ ATOMIC CITY ~ P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com = http://pd.net/atomic-city = All of our CDs can now be ordered directly from our WWW site, or by calling INFINITE ILLUSIONS: vox 904-385-6463 or 1-800-548-6724, or FAX 904-668-5825 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 08:19:19 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: John Krikawa Subject: Re: Composit (was screw Wagner) Todd writes in despair: >Please no more Wagner. I've had it with you filling my mailbox >with too many 'Valker-cries'. Wagner was a good composer, but not >the best that the Germans had too offer. Maybe if he had listened >to Nietzsche more often he might have gotten somewhere. > >However, this list is for the discussion of Electronic Music... Music >that is alive today and being created today on instruments of today. > >Thank you very much. > >Let the flames commence. No need for flamage, your thoughts are reasonable :) While I have enjoyed some of the historical perspectives the composition thread has brought about, some of it has become tedious (as it usually is for me -- I am no music scholar, and if I was I wouldn't tell anyone). I really liked how the thread started, with list members reaching inward and writing about their compositional style......in the age of MIDI gear, sequencers, notators, real-time tools. It has made me look at the way I get ideas into an aural form. From reading some of the posts, I think I may compromise myself by sitting down to jam without specific goals in mind: while it's great to just play, a direction would help if I am to get anything done. I also would like to work with notation a bit more -- I guess what I am trying to say is that the thread has instilled in me, new interest in compositional method in terms of mental preparation, environment, and approach. I hope to share some of the methods I have used to compose (and encourage others to continue to do so) after I take the time to step back and look at what I am doing. . . .what the #%$^&? I am finding that compositional method in today's electronic studios (many of which are home studios) is a very personal matter and sits deeply within the spirit. Regards, -john JKRIKAWA@CCIT.Arizona.Edu ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 11:49:30 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: RKilby127@AOL.COM Subject: Re: EMUSIC-L Digest - 10 Oct 1995 to 11 Oct 1995 In a message dated 95-10-11 01:06:59 EDT, you write: >Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 20:36:23 -0700 >From: Todd Eric Moore >Subject: Re: Screw Wagner > >Please no more Wagner. I've had it with you filling my mailbox >with too many 'Valker-cries'. Wagner was a good composer, but not >the best that the Germans had too offer. Maybe if he had listened >to Nietzsche more often he might have gotten somewhere. > >However, this list is for the discussion of Electronic Music... Music >that is alive today and being created today on instruments of today. > > Actually, if Wagner had GOTTEN "screwed" his music would probably have been more of an "upper." Still, anyone who could give us baby boomers "Kill duh Wabbit" can't be all bad. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 12:05:14 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mark simon Subject: The meaning of keys >furthermore, one finds consistently from zarlino (1500's) through leonard >bernstein that certain keys are associated with certain actions in music drama >or criticism. one cannot argue with the written historical evidence. This is a rather large claim, and I'd be interested to see you substantiate it with citations from numerous sources (perhaps by private email). I can easily believe that various people throughout history have associated various keys with various things, but always the same things with the same keys? > d minor happens to be the key of the hero who's desires have >been frustrated (for example siegmund in walkure). Are you talking about all music (emusic included), or just dramatic music? If any composer writes something in D minor does it mean there's a hero whose desires have been frustrated? Or are there other situations that might be associated with D minor, and if so how do you tell which one applies? >historically this stuff probably arose due to asymmetries in the system >of tuning, since historical tunings correlate 100% with the implications. > >the physiology of hearing demonstrates that every note is received at a >specific point in the ear and analyzed by a specific nerve. thus there >are also physiological reasons to understand that each note can be >distinguished at some level and retain its own set of associations. But are we talking about D minor at A=440 or A=415? If what you say is true, the meanings of the keys should have shifted by a half step or so over the past 200 years. Either Bach used C# minor as the key of a hero whose desires have been frustrated, or we should be using E flat minor for that purpose today. //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Mark G. Simon mgs2@cornell.edu \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 09:08:53 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: samples/overuse, repeat repete In-Reply-To: <199509191929.PAA82707@atlanta.american.edu> from "Eric Harnden" at Sep 19, 95 07:29:56 pm At long last an answer to ronin! Eric Harnden writes-- > >i see the use of recognizable samples, especially of speech, as >having a couple of layers of meaning in current electronic music. >first, it seems to be the audio equivalent of the MTV editing >effect... really rapid flashes of image/sound [...] > second, there is the notion of explicit commentary... [...] >third, there is just humor. [...] >induces a laugh. all of which is to say that i can't think of a >reason not to use such a sample, if you think it works. even >gratuitousness has purpose, if it's the effect you're looking for. I would tend to agree with this position, simply because it treats the artistic and emotional value of sampled material rather than harping solely on the legal issue of copyright and intellectual property. While i'm not one to casually set aside the law, even for hypothetical purposes, I can't help but do so in considering the musical esthetic of sample use. For a moment I stop thinking about if it's 'WRONG' or 'ILLEGAL' and examine what it's GOOD for, and my listing matches Eric's rather closely. I find the whole argument of 'gratuitous use' of almost ANYTHING in art to be a matter of personal taste, and prefer to shy away from it. If it works, it works. >as for overuse, i am of two minds. one of the things i've been >trying to stress recently, in thinking, teaching, and writing >about emusic, is that it is a full-fledged idiom. [...] This is an interesting point. I think you may run into conflict here, simply because your suggestion tht an electronic instrument is expected to constantly generate something fresh and new applies not so much to the audience of the genre, but to its proponents in some areas. Most of the synthesists I know of regard the use of existing tones as a sort of failure to perform, the timbral equivalent of premature orgasm. :) One could easily label this as a deep-seated insecurity and an overcompensation mechanism (I know I could, since I have been known to use lightly-tweaked or non-tweaked factory sounds if they serve an appropriate timbral purpose in my compositions), but that'd probably just start a flamewar, so I won't. Aren't you glad I didn't? (Damn, it's good to be back. :) >just off the top of my head, i guess i would consider a sound >overused it if it is used not only frequently but inappropriately >or lazily. I have trouble with 'lazily'...who really knows what's 'lazy' or merely an act of desperation by, say, an overworked jingle producer on deadline with a client who's heard DIGITALNATIVEDANCE on his competitor's commercials and wants the same thing? On the other hand, I like 'inappropriately', because the flip side is 'appropriately' --which implies that the player is listening to the work, and reacting to what it needs, not to what is most original. In my experience, the song usually knows what it needs.... >this is getting too long. let someone else mumble on the topic a >little bit, and then i'll come back to it. Consider it mumbled upon. :) >rerepost: ----- ease of use, snobbery, emusic crit ------ And at long lsat, I get to the 'grep metlay' in this thread...;) >1. metlay said something about the jd800 being difficult? Allow me to requote myself in completeness on this issue. What I said about the JD800 was that I found it difficult to deal with the fact that there is a significant chunk of the architecture of the synth that is still buried in a cursor-and-menu hell, and to use the front panel as the be-all-and-end-all requires that the synth be used in a sort of partial-availability mode and leaving some of its abilities to lie fallow. I'm perhaps not being entirely reasonable here, but when offered partial control of something worthwhile I get mad at what I CAN'T get at easily. I agree that the base architecture is just lovely, and the machine sounds very nice. I rather wish I had room in my studio, and in my head, for one, but I don't. (I also wish it could do everything the JD990 could, and had the 990's window rather than the two-line one...I'd have bought one already in that case, I think.) >. on the other hand, i have to say that, from the >instructor's perspective i have discovered that, while it >certainly seems open and intuitive to *me*, the modular moog >is one of the most imposing devices my students ever come >across. i think it has to do with the necessity to think the >whole thing out. in any other instrument the bulk of the >patching has been done for you, and you have limited >options. for many people, especially beginners, more choices >simply means more confusion. Not only for beginers. I am constantly, constantly looking for ways to slim down my studio to limit my options and help to focus my work; i am worried that Joe, who recently went from one synth to two synths, an effects box, and soon a small mixer, will suffer a drop in craetivity as his options explode into the fractal zoom. Also keep in mind that a Moog Modular is frightening due to sheer physical size; modern students are not used to something that darn BIG. I think that may be more of an issue than the freedom of choice...there are certain things one does to just get sound from the silly thang, and those tend to focus the beginner onto creative paths. >i have several instruments that i find a drag to program, but that >i keep because they have a particularly worthwhile set of >sounds. some of them i spend little time actually tweaking, >some of them i just force myself to sit down and deal with >every now and then, because i know that i can get out of the >box (away from the conventional) pretty quickly with the device. You're a tougher man than I am, Ronin. I am at a stage in my career where I simply cannot abide ANYTHING that gets in my way creatively, no matter how wonderful it sounds. If I can't use it, it doesn't stay. That's why I once owned, and no longer own, a DX11, a MicroWave, a full set of Lexicon LXP's with MRC, and various other boxes. My time is often devoted to simply finding something I can USE, and this issue dwarfs all others. I have learned that I can make great music with any box, as long as I can use it....so we have very different standards in this regard. >2. just to weigh in, here. yeah, the midivox ad sig is too >long. tighten it up a bit, willya? or do what metlay's >started doing (a reasonable compromise, i think)... putting >a pointer to info in sig one-liner. purely an esthetic >response, mind you... i don't really have strong feelings on >the subject. but the flame against it was unbelievably >snobbish. who the hell says, either that music education has >nothing to do with us, or that there's only one valid >pedagogy? sheesh. I actually got mail to this effect from one 'BruLinBar@aol.com', to whom I was unable to respond ("no such user, thank you for using America On Line, have a nice day"). All I'd suggest to Mr. Kelly is that he remove the blank lines and shorten his .sig that way so it takes up less screen real estate. I miss the days of forced four-line .sig limits sometimes...these full-ascii-graphics ones drive me nuts. >3. one of the things i like about emusic is that, for the >most part, its criticism is comparitively unpretentious. You don't read the same magazines I do, obviously. Try the Eurock catalog, i/e magazine, or Camera Obscura. While they all manage to communicate a fair amount of information that can be linked to 'you will or will not like this if you buy it', they can all get carried away. I had the great joy just last night of reading the reviews of the latest Atomic City releases in a couple of magazines, and had a blast with the metaphors used. :) >serious critics of it don't have a meaningless stock >vocabulary to pass it off with (with the possible exception >of the new age/space categories, which seem to be getting >thin analysis these days). Ah, I see the distinction you're making....okay. >they pretty much actually *talk* about it... in terms of >affect, effect, technique, and so on. of course, it's >difficult, which is why this group spends so much time on >what amounts to easier discourse: straightforward >gearheadedness and simple questions. but i still think that >we start from a somewhat different place, and tend to share >in general a preference for meaningful communication on our topic. Well, this IS the idea of EMUSIC-L, isn't it? Isn't it? Hello? >hmmm. it just occurred to me that maybe we should >make free verse the standard of expression on this group. i >mean, after all, once you get past the hardware, how else do >you say anything meaningful about the nature of experience? Eric old pal, you DO remember Alice Lei at MIT, don't you? She used to always post in free verse, and it made her writing a joy to read. Not all of us are that handy with words, though. >that's it... everyone please submit your queries and reviews >in haiku from now on. Ahem.... Sitting at the rack Vector mix just won't behave I tear at my hair mike -- choose your friends carefully-- your enemies will choose themselves for you ========================================================================== Mike Metlay ~ ATOMIC CITY ~ P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com = http://pd.net/atomic-city = All of our CDs can now be ordered directly from our WWW site, or by calling INFINITE ILLUSIONS: vox 904-385-6463 or 1-800-548-6724, or FAX 904-668-5825 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 09:27:00 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter Mueller Subject: Re: Translation please Comments: To: mgs2@CORNELL.EDU Sory about the ranting below, but I feel I must through my 2 cents in... Nobody has yet answered the question as to why one would want to write in sonata form anymore (unless of course you were to do so in a different medium, a quasi-sonata novel sounds intriguing). Why would you want to work in a form that was from the era of horse and buggies? The dialectic concept is a powerful one in music, but that does not mean it must be used in a manner like the 18th or 19th century.If there's anything to be learned from Stravinsky it's that if you use old models you have to significantly transform them or who's going to give a damn? Why would someone want to listen to the 500th imitation Kuhlau style sonata? In short, rigid forms are ok, sometimes even very helpful when composing, but make them your own. God help me if I have to sit through another 12 tone fugue (spoken by someone who has been composing 12 tone music, electronic and accoustic, for the past 20 years) -Peter ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 09:47:00 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter Mueller Subject: Re[2]: computer composit Comments: To: marshall.tuttle@TORII.COM Given the concept that specific keys have specific extramusical associations: >the physiology of hearing demonstrates that every note is received at a >specific point in the ear and analyzed by a specific nerve. thus there >are also physiological reasons to understand that each note can be >distinguished at some level and retain its own set of associations. The only thing that this doesn't account for is how tuning has changed over the years, not to mention places. Most of us know that many examples of 18th century tuning are about 1/2 step lower than today (i.e. a baroque B flat sounds like a modern A). But also different modern ensembles tune to different pitches, for example the Boston Symphony tunes to 442 rather than 440 (yes, the diference is noticable if you compare the two one after another, not to mention the difference that results in the timbre of the instruments) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 12:38:51 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Macalester College Music Department Subject: Re: Translation please In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Wed, 11 Oct 1995 09:11:22 -0400" <199510111311.JAA03209@postoffice.mail.cornell.edu> Mark...what about this translation: [This deals with] the answer as to why [it] is that the more rigid the form the more powerful the significance of any given moment which you [know] must occur and which is therefore more susceptible to meaningful (manipulation) [interpretation...as in during performance]. Whew... What I think I read is that there is a special impact of events when they occur within specific forms, and when the form lends a kind of expectable nature to the event which is coming. These events lend themselves to special emphasis by those executing (NO pun!, but a danger if overused) the piece. As a conductor, I know this to be true. When I have a work to conduct, and the composer gives me *exactly* the material I expect in precisely the place the piece has led me to expect it...at that moment, by doing something with my conducting, I can enhance in the positive sense, the musical impact of the coming event. I believe we are speaking about a very subtile and powerful kind of emphasis during performance. A kind of agogical modification process where the shape of the music is bent, molded perhaps, but not broken. It becomes more susceptible to meaningful manipulation. I believe the same to be true when construction electronic shapes, and this is a concept I deal with in some detail when I teach my electronic music course. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ + Ed Forner Macalester College Music Department + + forner@macalstr.edu voice (612) 696-6189 + +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 13:21:45 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: screw wagner > However, this list is for the discussion of Electronic Music... Music > that is alive today and being created today on instruments of today. i think we can learn from the past, after all a number of composers prior to us were successful in generating mechanisms for reaching audiences. if we ignore those techniques we will need to start from scratch. meanwhile it has been amply demonstrated over the millenia that it is possible to utilize techniques of previous generations in original ways which continue to be accessible to the audience and are not mere imitation. mt ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 13:17:28 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Translation please > >the answer as to why is that the more rigid the form the more powerful > >the significance of any given moment which you no must occur and which > >is therefore more susceptible to meaningful manipulation. sorry, that should have said "know must occur" the point is the following: if you know something has to happen (a recapitulation returning the main material of the piece in the original key for example), then how you achieve this is open to manipulation, and that manipulation therefore can take on expressive dimension, as any deviation from an exact repitition will will carry some significance. in the cases of mozart, haydn and beethoven every sonata/symphony they wrote has a recapitulation, but they each had different techniques for handling this issue. Mozart almost always wrote exact recapitulations, but preceded them with music of such wildly different character in many circumstances that the recapitulation is heard differently than the opening. Haydn played all the time with the concept of recapitulation by having it almost occur (wrong key but correct pitch level) or reording events (second theme before first theme), etc. Beethoven got into the habit of drastically altering the actual recapitulatory event itself and introducing widely ranging modulations in recapitulations to continue the affect of development. Wagner learned from Beethoven (gratuitous reference) by copying beethoven's 9th symphony by hand. if all form is ad hoc, i.e. generated by the material itself, then none of these gestures have any meaning. One of the defining conceits of classical style is the duty of the motive to respect its context (an analog of the the duty of the individual to fill his position in society). In its best instantions, this can appear to be a work where the material seems to generate the form, but such a concept is more consistent with later thinking. In adopting this conceit (pun intended) one loses the ability to use form itself as an expressive gesture, since it is derivable from some other level of the compositional process. hope this helps...., if not i'll tell you another one...... mt ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 10:45:07 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: computer composition inquiry In-Reply-To: from "roger king" at Oct 4, 95 01:36:00 pm roger king writes-- > >What techniques do various members of the emusic list utilize in >original composition? > >Please inform the list of ways you use to compose originals. Do you >utilize samplers, etc? Or perhaps a canary and a billiards table. Generally I sync together my CV sequencers and arpeggiators to a master clock and get a good solid multipart rhythm/arpeggio pattern/ chord pad going, then experiment with chord changes and arrangements. This leads to something worth saving about one time in fifty, but is a good exercise. I also compose by cutting and pasting events in Vision and by actually drawing out graphic score representations on paper, but those are usually when I already have a specific goal in mind. I very rarely use standard notation; I'm not a good sight reader and it's not very intuitive for getting ideas down in a hurry. mike -- choose your friends carefully-- your enemies will choose themselves for you ========================================================================== Mike Metlay ~ ATOMIC CITY ~ P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com = http://pd.net/atomic-city = All of our CDs can now be ordered directly from our WWW site, or by calling INFINITE ILLUSIONS: vox 904-385-6463 or 1-800-548-6724, or FAX 904-668-5825 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 21:58:39 +0200 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Uri Bruck Subject: Re: The meaning of keys >>furthermore, one finds consistently from zarlino (1500's) through leonard >>bernstein that certain keys are associated with certain actions in music drama >>or criticism. one cannot argue with the written historical evidence. > >This is a rather large claim, and I'd be interested to see you substantiate >it with citations from numerous sources (perhaps by private email). I can >easily believe that various people throughout history have associated >various keys with various things, but always the same things with the same >keys? > These associations were certainly consistent within a culture. For the ancient ones you can look up Plato. The Rennaisance artist sought to recreate the art of the ancients, and thus adopted many of their conventions. > >>historically this stuff probably arose due to asymmetries in the system >>of tuning, since historical tunings correlate 100% with the implications. >> >>the physiology of hearing demonstrates that every note is received at a >>specific point in the ear and analyzed by a specific nerve. thus there >>are also physiological reasons to understand that each note can be >>distinguished at some level and retain its own set of associations. > >But are we talking about D minor at A=440 or A=415? If what you say is true, >the meanings of the keys should have shifted by a half step or so over the >past 200 years. Either Bach used C# minor as the key of a hero whose desires >have been frustrated, or we should be using E flat minor for that purpose >today. > You are thinking equal temperament. But until Bach's time equal temperament was not in common usage, and even afterwards. The standard argument about the Well-Tempered Clavier claims that it was written to demonstrate the equal temperament of the various scales - however Well-Tempered means just that well-tempered not equal-tempered, well meaning according to the aesthetics conventions of the period which demanded slightly different tuning for each scale - this tuning is achieved by tuning perfect 5ths. Therefore shifting the basic note up or down has no effect on the scales, provided the shifting is done prior to tuning, the D-minor scale will still have its characteristic sound. A sound which depends on the relations between the notes and not the relations to some external measure. Uri > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 18:48:44 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Expolding into the fractal zoom In-Reply-To: <199510111608.JAA24009@netcom23.netcom.com> from "Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City" at Oct 11, 95 09:08:53 am > Not only for beginers. I am constantly, constantly looking for ways to > slim down my studio to limit my options and help to focus my work; i > am worried that Joe, who recently went from one synth to two synths, > an effects box, and soon a small mixer, will suffer a drop in > craetivity as his options explode into the fractal zoom. Actually, I wanted to make a quick comment about this. What I've done is to configure things into subinstruments. The EWI and Vortex make up one instrument, with the VFXsd being a separate entity. I've tried MIDIing the VFX to the EWI to have the VFX under EWI control, but the VFX (not surprisingly) gets brainburned by the incredible amount of incoming control input and forgets it has a keyboard. This can be fixed by doing a soft reset, but I frankly don't want to risk the VFX going down and staying there while I'm onstage. The two of them feed into the Mackie, and the Mackie's outs run to the main mixer board. Very simple, easy to work with. Mostly, I play the VFX and then switch over to the EWI when the mood strikes me. I'd say that my creativity has possibly increased; we never seem to play the same thing at any given pair of practice sessions, anyway... :) I'm having to actually work on clamping down and focusing, more than anything else. --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 17:29:06 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: John Krikawa Subject: Re: the great fractal zoom mike writes: mm>Not only for beginers. I am constantly, constantly looking for ways to mm>slim down my studio to limit my options and help to focus my work; i mm>am worried that Joe, who recently went from one synth to two synths, mm>an effects box, and soon a small mixer, will suffer a drop in mm>craetivity as his options explode into the fractal zoom. [happens every damn time......I really hate it] and joe responds: jm>What I've done is to configure things into subinstruments. The EWI and jm>Vortex make up one instrument, with the VFXsd being a separate entity. jm>I've tried MIDIing the VFX to the EWI to have the VFX under EWI control, jm>but the VFX (not surprisingly) gets brainburned by the incredible amount jm>of incoming control input and forgets it has a keyboard. [. . .] and, jm>The two of them feed into the Mackie, and the Mackie's outs run to the jm>main mixer board. Very simple, easy to work with. Mostly, I play the jm>VFX and then switch over to the EWI when the mood strikes me. Yeah, good workaround. Keeping it simple. That way you only learn two instruments (the third being the MIDI combination of EWI/Vortex+VFX!). jm>I'd say that my creativity has possibly increased; we never seem to play the jm>same thing at any given pair of practice sessions, anyway... :) I'm having to jm>actually work on clamping down and focusing, more than anything else. 'Too many options, focus, creativity, exponential, fear': the terms creep in when adding virtually any gear (except perhaps those fancy coffee cup holders). For me this ties in deeply with the compositional thread in that it is becoming more and more apparent that dealing with equipment needs to be done on an entirely different level, and often needs to be done before composing (at least the way I compose). I am tired of changing the way my equipment is linked and the software I use. Right now, I am striving for a bit of stability in the current studio configuration, but I have a ways to go in terms of getting technical details out of the way: I recently dumped Cakewalk, which I never got on with (_ever_), and bought Emagic's Logic 2.0. I'll stick with this one, it is excellent, however, it takes a long time to get a suitable 'environment' going on it. [a logic 'environment' is like a template from which to start sessions] Along with learning new software I got a PC88 a few months ago (yeah, poor me) and there is just so much shit that can be done with it. I have all these simultaneous realtime controls that I never had before. Further, I got a continuous controller pedal last week which can be mapped through the PC88 anyway I want. [the PC88 controls a K2000 and wavestation] The problem with the PC88 is that without extensive notes (which I suppose should be taken anyway) one can get lost: what did I map that slider to? Is the arpeggiator active in this mode?, etc., etc. There's too many damn ways to do stuff. [ObligHaiku: A fractal shroud cloaks my gear/who designed this thing?/I ordered a theremin] SO there's a ubiquitous technical counterpoint to getting music from heart to speaker. They are synergistic, profoundly different in approach, and highly co-dependent. [all of course in the spirit of my most humble opinion], Regards, -john JKRIKAWA@CCIT.Arizona.Edu ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 14:15:02 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: clive@PELICAN.DBE.CSIRO.AU Subject: Re: computer composition inquiry Mike wrote-- >Generally I sync together my CV sequencers and arpeggiators to a >master clock and get a good solid multipart rhythm/arpeggio pattern/ >chord pad going, then experiment with chord changes and arrangements. At the risk of diverting this thread, what arpeggiators do you use, Mike? And if you're using more than one at once, how do you stop them running away with the plot and mushing up the piece? (I was going to ask you how to handel this problem, but thought better of it). Regards Clive Clive McFarland CSIRO Australia clive@pelican.dbe.csiro.au ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 00:20:52 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Matt McCracken Subject: Re: Meaning inherent in tonality Adding to previous comments as to the naivete of meaning in tonality, I would remind all readers of these Wagnerian analyses that music's effect on the listener is very much if not entirely dependent on the upbringing of the listener. Would you say that Balinese musicians are butchering the musical "language" because they use a different tuning system? Of course not. If we all agreed that b-minor is the key of deliverance or F Major the key of "lethargy", great- music would function much like a language. But it never will, and much to my pleasure; after all, hasn't everybody at one time or another felt that a piece of music spoke to them "like no other?" Part of the beauty of music is that it is completely objective, and should always be looked at in this way. I'm sure Cage or Crumb would have a lot to say about the potency of Wagner's leitmotifs. I'm a Beethoven fan myself, but I could never prove it. (No antagonism intended, just discussion fodder) -Matt ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 21:29:58 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: translation pleas > Nobody has yet answered the question as to why one would want to > write in sonata form anymore sonata form still remains the most complex form invented. all other forms are simpler and thus less admissive of multi-leveled interactions between parts of the form. > Why would someone want to listen to the 500th imitation Kuhlau style > sonata? who wrote the first imitation, and did any permit him to live afterwards? the other 499 should have been shot prior to imitating kuhlayu > In short, rigid forms are ok, sometimes even very helpful when > composing, but make them your own. sonata form is not rigid. there is more variety in the sonata forms of Haydn for example than in all sonata forms of all other composers put together perhaps. sonata form is a principle for relating pa ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 21:44:33 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: the meaning of ke > >This is a rather large claim, and I'd be interested to see you > substantiate it with citations from numerous sources (perhaps by private email). I have already cited steblin's "History of key characteristics" and Jorgensen's "tuning". numerous references are cited therein. > >But are we talking about D minor at A=440 or A=415? If what you say is >true, the meanings of the keys should have shifted by a half step or so > over the past 200 years. Either Bach used C# minor as the key of a hero > whose desires have been frustrated, or we should be using E flat minor for >that purpose today. d minor as a written entity carries the association. the tuning evolved so slowly over time that it remained constant for all practical purposes over the course of generations. our scale evolves from the pythagorean system based on perfect fifths from a low of Bb up to a high of B. D and G are the central notes in this system and are thus given the symbolism of King (hero, sun) and Queen (mother, moon) respectively. no matter what pitch you tune at these notes in that system are always the center. I could go on but in respect to those who are complaining i will stop. please read the references i have cited if you are interested. mt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 06:48:16 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: meaning inherent > Adding to previous comments as to the naivete of meaning in > tonality, I would remind all readers of these Wagnerian analyses that music's effect on the listener is very much if not entirely dependent on the upbringing of the > listener. Would you say that Balinese musicians are butchering the musical > "language" because they use a different tuning system? Of course i don't know enough about balinese music to comment, but chinese music does in fact follow some similar practices to western music in this regard. and of course it is true that people speak different languages, so what? that does not alter the consistency of meaning within each language, nor does it change the fact that all languages are capable of conveying more or less the same types of meaning which is inherent in our nature as humans. > great music would function much like a language. But it never > will, and much to my pleasure; after all, hasn't everybody at one time or > another felt that a piece of music spoke to them "like no other?" Part of > the beauty of music is that it is completely objective, objective? do you mean subjective? is the beauty of music that it is equivalent to mathematics or science? actually i would argue your point: music should function like a language, since most 18th century composition texts use this analogy to a very deep level (and this is the stuff beethoven learned from). as for how music speaks to someone, it is possible (using the language analogy) to hear sentences in different ways, to find meaning in statements later in life that one did not find earlier in life and in general to develop in the ability to understand. this is also true in music. music is a language, but its subject is the structure of the archetypes of human being as opposed to external reality. those composers succeed most in reaching the largest audience whose music most nearly relates to the nature and structure of their thought and experience. > I'm sure Cage or Crumb would have a lot to > say about the potency of Wagner's leitmotifs. what cage or crumb (or you or i) say is of no consequence in this particular instance. the ultimate measure is the number of people who are touched by the music and the level at which they are moved. this is not to say that analysis and study of music in order to gain a better understanding of how it achieves its effects are irrelevant, but placing value on pieces as a reflection of taste is a waste of time no matter how notorious the person making the judgment. > I'm a Beethoven fan myself, but I could never prove it. on the contrary, you have just demonstrated it. mt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 11:02:35 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Re: computer composit -Reply I think the boom boxes are picking up a Barbara Striesand type singing "Those were the days my friend.", but the reception is sh*tty skwelching the voice and allowing crosstalk from Snoopy-Doggy-Puppy-Brain-Mangey-Mutt-Fang-N-Da-Gang rappin' on Butt Foam's demise over a pair of $90.0 shoe strings. The boomboxes are not quite identically tuned. Off set, two intermittant sirens car horns and a train whistle wail (Lietmotive for the Hobo-Man.) The crackling of the radio bleeds into the crackling of the oil drum trash fire illuminating the moment and finally into the crackling of the glass pipe. (Face shot defocuse to grey/black) "Dante" Orchestral swell with gong... and hold ... and release into a Debussey-like dream state over tablas and contrabass pedal tone... refocus... in the patrol car. Blood all over Scottie's clothes... babbling...something about "but he smoked the last dylithium crystal"... MasterBlaster being placed in the ambulance... the audience... Where Did The Audience Go? Come On, it's not even intermission! -rob ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 10:18:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: roger king Subject: "It Was A Lover And His Lass" Is there a musical term describing what takes place when a meter shift occurs three times in three measures? How can I describe the feeling I got the first time I heard that section of Thomas Morley's "It Was A Lover And His Lass?" Something beautiful happens between measures 14 and 17. The joyous spirit of springtime gets expressed by stretching the melody without making a tempo decelaration: At 14 in 4/4 "Spring, in springtime" At 15 in 3/4 "In springtime, the" At 16 in 6/8 "only pretty" At 17 in 4/4 "ring time when birds do sing hey" Upon first try, during a baritone vocal lesson, I felt as if the floor had changed levels. My knees buckled trying to pull this metric shift out of the old wind barrel. Is there a term for this remarkable style of compositional phrasing? Can you give me other examples for purpose of analysis? i.e. did Wagner use it in any of his works? Roger King jollyroger@iquest.net swashbuckler of cybersonics ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 10:18:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: roger king Subject: Save Our Shark Upon hearing any noise from outside the tank our pet shark thrashes and crashes in a wicked panic attack. Such behavior causes trauma for our pet shark, and it occasionally knocks itself unconscious. And this gets the wenches upset...worried the fish has done itself in. Someone told me sound travels faster through water. [John Lilly? :)] Can anyone inform us as to how much faster sound travels through water? Also, does the amount of salt in the water make any difference? I want to set up a psychoacoustic behavioral experiment, in order to Save Our Shark. I will compare the behavioral reaction of the shark to shifted renditions of DeBusey to those of Jolly Roger's "The Center Of The Cyclone." The reactions will be measured using video.An hypothesis will be tested: "The behavioral reaction of the pet shark to DeBusey will be much milder than its reaction to Jolly Roger." Please advise me as to the amount the sound must be slowed down in order for the shark to sense the same DeBusey bliss my ears enjoy. Roger King jollyroger@iquest.net swashbuckler of cybersonics ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 11:58:41 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Brooke Wetzel Subject: Max Mathews to appear at Peabody The Computer Music Department at the Peabody Conservatory of Music in Baltimore, Maryland pleased to announce a lecture and recital of Computer Music featuring the Mathews Radio-Baton and Conducting Program, given by Max Mathews, Maureen Chowning, and Dexter Morrill. The lecture and recital will begin at 6:30 PM on Wednesday, October 18, 1995 in Leakin Hall at the Peabody Conservatory. Max Mathews is one of the foremost figures in computer Music. He was a pioneer in the field of digital software synthesis at the AT&T Bell Labs in the 1950's. Mathews' more recent work at Stanford University is concentrated on live performance with computer instruments. Soprano Maureen Chowning will perform with Dr. Mathews in several works for the radio-baton and conducting program. Chowning is a graduate of the Boston Conservatory of Music, and is now active in the San Francisco area. She is a noted performer of contemporary music, and has premiered many new works, both in this country and abroad. Composer and Trumpeter, Dexter Morrill is the director of the Computer Music Studio at Colgate University, where he is the Charles A. Dana Professor of Music. Morrill has received composition grants from the New York State Arts Council, the National Endowment for the Arts, and other performing organizations. His works are recorded on the Golden Crest, Musical Heritage, Redwood and Centaur labels. This event is free and open to the public. For more information via World Wide Web, please see: http:www.peabody.jhu.edu/depts/ecm/CMConsort_Oct95.html ____________________________________________________________________ David Brooke Wetzel Electronic and Computer Music Peabody Conservatory Baltimore, Maryland ____________________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 16:00:33 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: The meaning of keys -Reply If the correlation between frequency sets and physiological responses was so significant, this trend would be cross cultural, or universally recognized in all cultures. In reality, they can't even agree on how many pitches belong in the octave, and the relative spacing between these pitches. Think Indian Raga in B-minor. It's as silly as a whole tone piece blues. I think technical factors such as availability of open strings, and fingerings, timbre and volume characteristics of different registers which heavily influence the available stylistic palette dominate. Bugle calls fall in the available overtone sequence of the keyless bugle for instance. This sound gets associated with martial music. To invoke the sense of patriotic valor, the composer looks around and says, gee, maybe a realistic bugle call would do it. But there's no reason you can't build a slightly bigger bugle that's in a different key. -rob ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 15:13:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: roger king Subject: Re: Composit (was..etc) Todd wrote: >However, this list is for the discussion of electronic music... >music that is alive today and being created on instruments >of today. Any music can be electronic and any sound a voice. We could discuss sampling cricket mating calls for use as open and closed hi-hats in a percussion patch. That would be electronic music. We could take four bars of a Rossini overture, loop them with a Proteus, have a rhythm machine pound out a groove while we're doing that; and, get a rapper to describe their forty through a filter mike sent through a flanger. It would still be music, no matter how many folks yawned. And it would be electronic music. Do you mean to say that this list should really be called: alt.yes.fan alt.emerson.fan or alt.wakeman.fan? If some dude came up with an interesting patch in 1878 then it's still fly today when I'm playing a synth. Y'all can rag on the Wag but the man changed music forever by taking the fugue he learned from his teacher, Herr Geyer, and pulling out all the stops in the way fugue can be used to express meaning. All you gotta do is delete what your not into on a list. More Captain & Toni anyone? Roger King jollyroger@iquest.net swashbuckler of cybersonics ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 16:56:05 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: MORGAN ELLINGTON SMITH Subject: German sequencer Cappriccio I have a copy of the German sequencer "Cappriccio", which I am very fond of. I got it from the internet (it's a fully funcional demo version). When I started out midi'ing a few years ago I used Dos-based sequencers (old cakewalk, and sequencer plus pro). I've always hated the cakewalk interface (even the cakewalk professional that I've dabbled in at a friend's house). When I bought an AWE_32 soundcard, however, these sequencers had no drivers for the AWE_32. I've been trying out many demos and I'm happy with Cappriccio -- I prefer ease of use in a sequencer to tons of options. Does anybody know of an english version of this? I'm adjusted to the german commands but the help files are quite beyond me. Also, maybe then I could find out where I can actually buy this program for real! Thanks, sorry about the excess background info, Morgan E. Smith ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 19:01:09 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Save our shark > Please advise me as to the amount the sound must be > slowed down in order for the shark to sense the same DeBusey > bliss my ears enjoy. if you want your shark to enjoy debussy just throw some blood in the water when you play it..... heck, it might even learn to like wagner if you did that! mt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 19:08:50 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: The meaning of keys - > If the correlation between frequency sets and physiological .......etc. the evidence is there. I have cited references. without reading it any critique is not worth much. Bugles have been built in all the keys. chinese music does have a rotating set of twelve keys just as ours do, and they tend to signify the same parts of the year as ours do..... blah blah blah.... just read about it. i didn't make it up. conjecture is irrelevant since it is already there. (by the way, even beethoven referred to it in his notebooks). mt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 21:46:51 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Matt McCracken Subject: Ongoing Discussion.... Yeah, certainly music would be pretty shallow if it was entirely objective... Somehow I always confuse the words. Anyway, I feel a little clarification is necessary. Since the dissection of language for the purpose of debate seems to be the norm on this list, I suppose I must try to be as careful with my words as possible. I was trying to make only one point in essence. I disagree with the statement that music has inherent extramusical meaning. Frankly, the idea is quite ridiculous to me. If one looks at the evidence that has been cited and approaches it from a different angle I don't think it holds up. Certainly composers and musicians from all times agree that music can be used to express specific emotions. In this way it certainly does function as a language- a tool for communication on some level. I would even say that music can be used to express specific, literal information- provided the performer and the listener both agree on its translation (or intended meaning). We are not born into an English speaking world- we don't know English until it is taught to us. There is no part of us that knows the smallest of the words in our language. We agreed on them, as an English-speaking whole, a long time ago. Music has been around even longer, but we agreed on that, too- those of us accustomed to Western tonality, from our surroundings, can most certainly draw extramusical ideas from them. However the structure of "Western" music as it exists and has always existed is simply not a specific enough language to express these ideas literally. If each key represented a specific emotion, that would mean I could only have a maximum of 24 emotions, or even twelve, if you think enharmonically! I don't mean to trivialize the point- I understand that composers such as Wagner used keys and key relationships to "symbolize" extramusical ideas. To be honest I think it is an intensely interesting and noble idea (in all seriousness). I just don't believe that if I get something else from the music I am misunderstanding it, not to mention not enjoying it. You cannot predict a person's reaction to music. That is absolute. That is why I said I could never prove that I liked Beethoven. My liking of his music is a reaction I cannot and do not wish to identify. It just happens. I think my point is self evident, isn't it? -Matt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 22:31:42 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Prophecy >Hmmm. Please qualify your terms. Just one synthesizer, as in just one >synthesizer to place in a studio with other, non-electronic musical >instruments, or just one musical instrument? My answer will be slightly >different, depending.... I was thinking of the former, I think; but then I was also thinking in terms of live performance: a musician turning up with just a Prophecy and nothing else (but possibly playing with other musicians). But then, as always, you picked up on my intended threads of argument. I don't recall any guitar being 64-voice multitimbral with thousands of instantly selectable patches, an onboard sequencer and a disk drive, so why should we be critical of the Prophecy for failing to measure up to other synthesisers? >This, of course, skirts the issue of whether the features the Prop >DOES have are as good as some folks say they are... True enough. The reports I've heard have been roughly 50-50 in terms of outright adulation versus quite distinct thumbs-downs. (thumbses-down?) Those in favour seem to like having an analogue-ish machine with arpeggiator for live work; personally, I'm interested in the programmability and control of the modelling engine. Filter sweeps and arpeggiators? We have seen it all before, didn't we, didn't we? Nick Rothwell CASSIEL Contemporary Music/Dance nick@cassiel.com "Success can be measured by only one thing: the hairs on the back of your neck." -- Twyla Tharp ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 18:59:01 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: "it was a lover and h > At 14 in 4/4 "Spring, in springtime" > At 15 in 3/4 "In springtime, the" > At 16 in 6/8 "only pretty" > At 17 in 4/4 "ring time when birds do sing hey" > > Upon first try, during a baritone vocal lesson, I felt as if > the floor had changed levels. My knees buckled trying to pull > this metric shift out of the old wind barrel. > > Is there a term for this remarkable style of compositional > phrasing? Can you give me other examples for purpose of analysis? > i.e. did Wagner use it in any of his works? this type of rhythmic play was common from the time of about 1450 to about 1650. you can here something like it in martin luther's original version of "a mighty fortress is our god" or in the work of schutz. it lost favor as various aspects of harmony developed in the late sixteen hundreds which demanded a more regular metrical pulse in order to maintain coherence of chords. about the only thing left like that in the standard repertoire is the hemiola: 3 2/4 groupings in a 3/4 tempo filling up two measures. Brahms was famous for this, but everybody did it. not till stravinsky did such rhythmic play return to music. mt ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 19:29:03 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Todd Eric Moore Subject: Re: Composit (was..etc) You wrote: > >Todd wrote: > >>However, this list is for the discussion of electronic music... >>music that is alive today and being created on instruments >>of today. > >Any music can be electronic and any sound a voice. Thus if it's recorded it's electric music? Then from that I infer my alarm clock is making electronic music. Too bad it can't hold a tune! > >We could discuss sampling cricket mating calls for use as >open and closed hi-hats in a percussion patch. >That would be electronic music. > Any sound can be used for electronic music. The discussion of the compositional motivations of composers is better left for user groups that discuss the works of composers. The discussion of why a composer used certain 'electronic' sounds for a piece are appropriate for this venue. >We could take four bars of a Rossini overture, loop them >with a Proteus, have a rhythm machine pound out a A Proteus doesn't sample, it just plays back pre-sampled sounds. >groove while we're doing that; and, get a rapper to >describe their forty through a filter mike sent through >a flanger. It would still be music, no matter how >many folks yawned. And it would be electronic music. > >Do you mean to say that this list should really be >called: alt.yes.fan > alt.emerson.fan > or alt.wakeman.fan? Are you a complete bigot, have you forgotten alt.Gabriel-era-Genesis and alt.Collins-era-Genesis or alt.Styx or . . . . yawn. > >If some dude came up with an interesting patch in 1878 It was call an orchestra then. And they weren't programmable just trainable monkeys playing dots on paper. >then it's still fly today when I'm playing a synth. >Y'all can rag on the Wag but the man changed music >forever by taking the fugue he learned from his >teacher, Herr Geyer, and pulling out all the stops >in the way fugue can be used to express meaning. > Not raggng on Wagner, ragging on multiple pieces of motivational composing habits of dead composers cramming my reader. Who are to say what his motivations were? We only have the accounts of historians and spurned philosophers. >All you gotta do is delete what your not into on a list. >More Captain & Toni anyone? With a plate of SPAM please. >jollyroger@iquest.net > >swashbuckler of cybersonics > ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 14:47:03 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Re: computer composit -Reply >if you who don't understand wagner, don't understand german and >can't grasp a form which may take 60 or 70 minutes to unfold you don't >need to like it, but please refrain from making such irresponsible >uninformed generalizations. For those of us who just don't get it, there's a wonderful book you can pick up that will further reinforce the supremacy of German Culture, and the justification for intolerance against those scum which conspire to dilute and deflect this culture from it's rightful destiny. That Book: "Mien Kamp", by Adolf Hitler. Incidently, the author was a celebrated admirer of Wagner. [Note to scum: you know who you are, watch out!] ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 09:17:00 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter Mueller Subject: Re[2]: translation pleas Comments: To: marshall.tuttle@TORII.COM > Nobody has yet answered the question as to why one would want to > write in sonata form anymore sonata form still remains the most complex form invented. all other forms are simpler and thus less admissive of multi-leveled interactions between parts of the form. > Why would someone want to listen to the 500th imitation Kuhlau style > sonata? who wrote the first imitation, and did any permit him to live afterwards? the other 499 should have been shot prior to imitating kuhlayu > In short, rigid forms are ok, sometimes even very helpful when > composing, but make them your own. sonata form is not rigid. there is more variety in the sonata forms of Haydn for example than in all sonata forms of all other composers put together perhaps. This is true. Sonata form is really fun to work with if you don't think of at as a form so much as rather a manifistation of the dialectic principle. Hell, it didn't even get written down (or quantized, if you prefer) by the theorists until the middle of the nineteenth century. That's part of the reason that Haydn (and Beethoven) were so free with formal construction of these things, both thematically and harmonically, they didn't have a template that they were working from. It wasn't until the ninteenth century, especially with the mystique of the masterpiece coming out, that the form, in many lesser composers, became ossified and became a "Form" rather than a dramatic organizational and conception. >-- Saved internet headers (useful for debugging) >Received: from atlanta.american.edu by mail.ucsd.edu; id AAA25304 sendmail 8.6. >Received: from atlanta (atlanta.american.edu [147.9.1.6]) by atlanta.american.e >Received: from AMERICAN.EDU by AMERICAN.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with >Received: (from daemon@localhost) by atlanta.american.edu (8.6.12/8.6.11) id >Received: from telepath.com (zoom1.telepath.com [205.228.200.20]) by a >Received: from torii.com (torii@localhost) by telepath.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with >Received: by torii.com id 0U7B000B Wed, 11 Oct 95 21:29:58 -0600 >X-Mailer: TBBS/TIGER v1.0/PRIMP 1.56p >Message-ID: <9510112129.0U7B000@torii.com> >Date: Wed, 11 Oct 1995 21:29:58 -0600 >Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List >Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List >From: Marshall Tuttle >Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 >Subject: Re: translation pleas >To: Multiple recipients of list EMUSIC-L ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 23:05:51 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Timothy Kelly Subject: Re: Ongoing Discussion.... Hi All, Interesting thread. Music obviously has inherent extramusical meaning. Common sense throughtout recorded history, and legends before recorded history all agree on this point, that music is much more than just a bunch of notes and sounds. Music is the only universal language. Music was the first language, a tonal language of sounds, then songs, and then finally words. We are born with a basic understanding of spoken languages, the small sound building blocks that we use in speech and song. No one teachs us this, no parent teachs a child how to make sounds, how to combine sounds into words, and how to put words into language. Entire walls of books have been written by language researchers trying to explain by what sort of telepathy children learn to speak. Only about 10% of a small childs vocabulary comes from what its outer ears hear, where is the other 90% coming from? It is easy to predict the effects a certain piece of music will have on certain population groups. This is done all the time by those in the record industry, composers, performers. The physical, emotional, and mental effects certain rhythms, melodies, sound and lyric images will have on target audiences is used all the time. Theres a lot of freedom in todays music. There also comes along with it an responsibility for what we create and perform and the effect it has on people as a whole. Happy Music. Timothy Kelly MidiVox -- MidiVox-Worlds 1st Voice to Midi Converter. Real Time. No Delays. Hum a Bass, Croon a Sax, Scat a Horn, Scream a Guitar, Rap some Drums, Sing a Cello. Become a Human Sequencer, Human Vocoder, Human Breath Controller. AES "Best in Show." EM "Editors Choice." " MidiVox Roars." Keyboard. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 06:06:43 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Ongoing discussion... > I could never prove that I liked Beethoven. My liking of his music is a > reaction I cannot and do not wish to identify. It just happens. I > think my point is self evident, isn't it? I don't think so, and I shall elaborate: you like beethoven. this is a matter of personal taste and nothing more. you have asserted this. therefore it is proven that you like beethoven. on a more serious level, several of your points need to be responded to: > We are not born into an English speaking world- we don't know > English until it is taught to us. There is no part of us that knows the > smallest of the words in our language. We agreed on them, as an > English-speaking whole, a long time ago. no one is born speaking english, but everyone is born with the capacity to learn a human language. this includes all the mental structures necessary to assign meaning to statements, to name items and actions (the only linguistic capacity to which you referred) and to create and understand sentences which were never before heard, assigning them grammatical and semantic value. (actually this capacity develops in the first few years of life, but for the purposes of argument we will assume it is innate since it is lacking only in the profoundly retarded). you may see for example Brown's Genesis of a Language for some research and description of this. thus, though the specific words of english are not in our vocabulary at birth, the structure of mind which allows english to occur is. in fact that structure is in everybody's mind at birth and the language capacity is specifically human. if we look at music historically and anthropologically we find similar issues emerging. music is used for the same kind of functions in cultures from hunter-gatherer through our own post-industrial it tends to occur in the same places in society and do the same tasks. there is obviously an archetypal thing going on here. your interpretation may be limited somewhat by your use of "emotion" as that which is signified by music. in fact what is expressed is a cloud of associations more suited to archetypal organizational factors. some of these may in fact seem to be contradictory. (as are archetypal images, of which there are examples to numerous to cite). an example: Ab as i have mentioned often stands for the highest desirable goal (not an emotion). It also stands for an uncrossable boundary (Moses standing on the river Jordan looking across into israel which he cannot enter). here the association is clear: the ideal is something which cannot in fact be achieved. it also stands for (at least in 19th century) the grand gentelman. all of this can be derived from the fact that during the early baroque Ab-Eb was the largest fifth in the tuning system, and therefore it naturally would carry associations of breadth and grandness. None of this refers to emotions, but relates more to how we structure knowledge. at any rate, the evidence exists in the form of historical writings, and the people you admire (beethoven etc.) can be demonstrated to have participated in it. we can therefore reasonably assume it was part of his compositional process. mt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 07:50:30 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter K Schoenhoff Subject: Re: computer composit -Reply In-Reply-To: ; from "Robert M. Sanders" at Oct 12, 95 11:02 am These are the graceful words of Robert M. Sanders: ->I think the boom boxes are picking up a Barbara Striesand type singing ->"Those were the days my friend.", but the reception is .... I'd not be surprised if Sriesand recorded it, but the original *popular* recording was by Mary Hopkins, who was one of a *very* few artists to be signed with the Beatles on the Apple label. She had a number one in USA (I think,) and apparently enjoyed even greater success in England. She was the only one ever to make a hit out of the song. The song's title was just "Those Were The Days" Other Artists who recorded on Apple, for the currious: James Taylor, Badfinger, Ravi Shankar, Modern Jazz Quartet Jackie Lomax Billy Preston Doris Troy John Tavener The Radha Krishna Temple And of course, each of the solo Beatles, or their bands (Plastic Ono Band, Wings) -- -Pete Schoenhoff _\|/_ pschoenh@pen.k12.va.us (didn't record on Apple) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 09:00:55 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mark simon Subject: More on forms >Mark...what about this translation: > > > >[This deals with] the answer as to why [it] is that the more rigid the form the >more powerful the significance of any given moment which you [know] must occur >and which is therefore more susceptible to meaningful (manipulation) >[interpretation...as in during performance]. > > > >Whew... > >What I think I read is that there is a special impact of events when they occur >within specific forms, and when the form lends a kind of expectable nature to >the event which is coming. These events lend themselves to special emphasis by >those executing (NO pun!, but a danger if overused) the piece. As a conductor, >I know this to be true. Aha, this is starting to make sense. Yes, this is exactly true. So much of meaning in music revolves around the way the composer plays with the audience's expectations. Conventional forms allow the listener to extrapolate on what might happen in the course of the music that's playing and then respond when the music either fulfills or doesn't fulfill that expectation. ****** One of the points I've heard made over and over again on this list is that timbre is a structural element in emusic to a much greater degree than it is in other music, that the creation of a sound on a synthesizer is a much deeper part of the creative act than orchestration is in classical music. This is why complaints about unoriginal sounds make up an ongoing thread here. Yet might it not be possible for a composer to use familiar sounds to play with listener expectations the same way that Haydn or Beethoven might have used a recapitualation? Or is my analogy incorrect. Might sounds be used, rather, for their associative values. Might a certain patch express a hero's desires frustrated in the same way that D minor supposedly does? //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Mark G. Simon mgs2@cornell.edu \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////// ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 09:33:47 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Re[2]: translation pleas -Reply That's part of the reason that Haydn (and Beethoven) were so free with formal construction of these things, both thematically and harmonically, they didn't have a template that they were working from. It wasn't until the ninteenth century, especially with the mystique of the masterpiece coming out, that the form, in many lesser composers, became ossified and became a "Form" rather than a dramatic organizational and conception. I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on cadenzas and the diminishing role of improvisation in the context of form formalization. -rob ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 07:51:38 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: Save Our Shark In-Reply-To: from "roger king" at Oct 12, 95 10:18:00 am roger king writes-- > > Please advise me as to the amount the sound must be >slowed down in order for the shark to sense the same DeBusey >bliss my ears enjoy. I think my sense of humor still hasn't recovered from the recent weeks of 20-hours days in the lab...this is a joke, right? mike -- choose your friends carefully-- your enemies will choose themselves for you ========================================================================== Mike Metlay ~ ATOMIC CITY ~ P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com = http://pd.net/atomic-city = All of our CDs can now be ordered directly from our WWW site, or by calling INFINITE ILLUSIONS: vox 904-385-6463 or 1-800-548-6724, or FAX 904-668-5825 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:52:39 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Ongoing Discussion.... -Reply Let's test this theory on the emotional suggestivity of keys, etc. I propose that somebody assess the correlation between various demographic indicators such as crime, marriage, divorce, murder, suicide and church attendance rates in a large community to the frequency with which each "aurally suggested emotion" is broadcast via radio for a period of months in some large city. A renowned expert in this archaic symbology would be allowed to interpret the "content" of each broadcast. If no renowned expert can be agreed upon, then someone skilled in the related art of reading skull bumps would do. (In fact, we'd have to examine the skull of the expert too.) Each demographic group would have a different mix of each of these archaic symbol suggestors (King, Queen, Court Jester?).Then you compare how each demographic group responded to it's input. Another thought on this. If I sample Wagner, then use it behind a back beat and jive over it, does this inevitable relationship between the key and the user's response stay unchanged? What if I have a telephone ringing and a baby crying in the background? Is it perhaps dangerous to allow people to listen to these sounds in uncontrolled environments? Might they inadvertently combine these powerful symbols in an unexpected manner, creating riots or mayhem? Or worse, forsaking the classics for something you can boogie to? If it works, we can broadcast this scientifically refined Muzak into prisons, schools etc. and forge a new Utopia. -rob ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 15:52:19 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Christian Alkemper Organization: JOGU Mainz - FASK Subject: Re: Meaning inherent in tonality Matt McCracken Wrote: > Would you say that Balinese musicians are > butchering the musical > "language" because they use a different tuning system? Of course > not. If we > all agreed that b-minor is the key of deliverance or F Major the key > of > "lethargy", great- music would function much like a language. But > it never > will, and much to my pleasure; after all, hasn't everybody at one > time or > another felt that a piece of music spoke to them "like no other?" > Part of > the beauty of music is that it is completely objective, and should > always be > looked at in this way. I'm sure Cage or Crumb would have a lot to > say about the potency of Wagner's leitmotifs. And if we are coming over now from the techniques of the masters of old (who I admire very much) to the philosophical aspects of music (BTW, these are quite interesting), I d like to contribute a matter of feeling: I started to make music myself five years ago, and since then, I sometimes think I ve lost the feeling to listen to music with my heart; I m just listening to it with my brain - you know, structures, sounds and things like that. The ability to let music "speak to me", as Matt said it, seems to be gone and has reappeared quite seldom since then. Who has made similar experiences? Tell me about it, for I want to enjoy music as such, and not only as a "composition"! Krisch----------------------------------------------------------- Christian Alkemper (aka Krisch aka XPiC) Adress : Orffstr. 10, D- 76726 Germersheim, Germany Email : ALKEMPER@nfask2.fask.uni-mainz.de Musician: Keyboards, Piano, Synth and Sequencer Programming Drumming (preferably E-Drumming) Bands : Neuzeit Syndrom, Bonedog (-1993; R.I.P.) Solo : XPiC, Nostalgia (-1992; R.I.P.) Ambition: Lots and lots... Music : EBM and Electronic Wave, New Wave... Favourit: Leaether Strip, Clock DVA, XMTP, FLA and many many more. (We may discuss...) Further : Translator English-German-Russian, all music- related subjects (Orders welcome, need money) Quote : "Jeder macht mal minus..." (Puenktchen aus L) _ _ ___ ___ \ / / / . / \/ /__/ / /\ / / / _/ \_ / / /___ (do you understand...finally??) ---------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 08:24:40 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: Prophecy In-Reply-To: from "Nick Rothwell" at Oct 12, 95 10:31:42 pm Nick Rothwell writes-- > >>Hmmm. Please qualify your terms. Just one synthesizer, as in just one >>synthesizer to place in a studio with other, non-electronic musical >>instruments, or just one musical instrument? My answer will be slightly >>different, depending.... > >I was thinking of the former, I think; but then I was also thinking in >terms of live performance: a musician turning up with just a Prophecy and >nothing else (but possibly playing with other musicians). Oho. I would posit, old friend, that you're setting up a self-referential argument here: you're pleased with the idea of a synthesizer as a live performance instrument, monophony allows for more direct articulation control, and the Prophecy is unquestionably the most technically advanced and controller-rich monosynth out there. Ergo, etc. :) >But then, as always, you picked up on my intended threads of argument. Hell, it's only been what, seven years now? :) >I don't recall any guitar being 64-voice multitimbral with thousands of >instantly selectable patches, an onboard sequencer and a disk drive, so why >should we be critical of the Prophecy for failing to measure up to other >synthesisers? People aren't used to thinking of keyboards as being in different flavors any more. Back in the days before cheap programmable synths, no one expected a string synth to be an organ or a piano to be a Clavinet. There is an unfortunate homogenization of the market taking place, as prevailing forces encourage more and more workstations. I believe the next step, already being embraced by countless [insert appropriate noun here] worldwide, is the synth-on-a-card within the computer (more features, less cost, and who cares if the UI is inaccessible anyway?), and very soon after that, synths will just be codes run by computers' internal generic bits-to-soundwaves machinery. It will happen fast, and hard, and those of us who like individual boxes will just be old greybeards. Of course, every once in a while you can actually find works by someone who's not afraid to improvise on a polyphonic synth in real time, just playing a patch and to heck with one hand onthe wheels; Anthony Phillips blowing out the walls on a badly-overdriven Polymoog springs to mind.... >True enough. The reports I've heard have been roughly 50-50 in terms of >outright adulation versus quite distinct thumbs-downs. (thumbses-down?) That matches my tally. >Those in favour seem to like having an analogue-ish machine with >arpeggiator for live work; personally, I'm interested in the >programmability and control of the modelling engine. Those against it have hated the sound and the UI. >Filter sweeps and >arpeggiators? We have seen it all before, didn't we, didn't we? Repeat repeeeeeeeat, repeat repeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeat.... Thanks a lot, Nick. Now I'm gonna have that damn song going through my head for a week. Urgh. "There is nothing new at all, isn't there, isn't there, repeat repeeeeat, repeat repeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeat" mike -- choose your friends carefully-- your enemies will choose themselves for you ========================================================================== Mike Metlay ~ ATOMIC CITY ~ P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com = http://pd.net/atomic-city = All of our CDs can now be ordered directly from our WWW site, or by calling INFINITE ILLUSIONS: vox 904-385-6463 or 1-800-548-6724, or FAX 904-668-5825 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 11:32:01 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: modal horns -Reply from R. King: The possible number of three chord combinations from these "Holy" chords would be 17280, if repeats were allowed. Is my math correct? I calculate (12)*(12)*(12)=1728. -rob ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 11:30:14 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: computer composit -Reply In-Reply-To: from "Robert M. Sanders" at Oct 12, 95 02:47:03 pm > For those of us who just don't get it, there's a wonderful book you can > pick up that will further reinforce the supremacy of German Culture, and > the justification for intolerance against those scum which conspire to > dilute and deflect this culture from it's rightful destiny. That Book: "Mien > Kamp", by Adolf Hitler. Incidently, the author was a celebrated admirer of > Wagner. Comparison to Hitler: We have Official End of Thread. Actually, we have sailed into the stratosphere of musicology, but it has been an interesting trip along the way. I do believe that the typical electronic musician (me included) needs more exposure to classical forms, if for no other reason than they are fertile ground for examples of things to do (and not do). --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 08:46:58 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: computer composition inquiry In-Reply-To: from "clive@PELICAN.DBE.CSIRO.AU" at Oct 12, 95 02:15:02 pm clive@PELICAN.DBE.CSIRO.AU writes-- > >>Generally I sync together my CV sequencers and arpeggiators to a >>master clock and get a good solid multipart rhythm/arpeggio pattern/ >>chord pad going, then experiment with chord changes and arrangements. > >At the risk of diverting this thread, what arpeggiators do you use, Mike? >And if you're using more than one at once, how do you stop them running >away with the plot and mushing up the piece? (I was going to ask you how >to handel this problem, but thought better of it). And I truly appreciate it; you're being mendelsohn enough as it is. At one time or another, I have owned or used (usually both) almost every arpeggiator ever put in a musical instrument, from the Roland U-20 to the Emu Emax. ("Cruz Control"; lovely feature...) At its height, my studio had the ability to run five arpeggiators simultaneously and in sync, including the Sequential Pro-One, the Korg Mono/Poly, and the Korg DW-8000, but nowadays I own only two arpeggiators: the one in my Prophet VS, and my Oberheim Cyclone. The Cyclone I ranted and raved about at great length as to its unreliability. I have discovered that with certain very careful restrictions, it can be reasonably reliable: if you isolate it on its own I/O pair on a Studio 5LX, filter everything it sees and everything it puts out, NEVER let it see sysex, and don't actually try to save a preset after you edit it to taste, it's a fine box. You can remove the restriction on saving edits if you have the 1.2 ROM. The VS has, without question, my favorite arpeggiator ever. It is intuitive, easy to use, rock-solid, has very interesting and lovely features, and its option/menuing features are enormously clear and effective. Unfortunately, I cannot justify the expense of keeping and maintaining my VS, which is in beautiful shape but is (as all VSes are) subject to aging problems that I won't have the time or money to face, just for the arpeggiator. I fully anticipate eventually getting one with several dead and irrecoverable voice boards, for extremely little money, and using it strictly as an arpeggiator; I'm looking at the schematics and determining how easy it would be to cannibalize the needed PC boards and put it into a smaller case with a better keyboard and controls. Since the aftertouch sensor almost never works anyway, it would be easy enough to retrofit something like a dead Kawai K1....but I digress. (BADLY.) It is indeed possible to let the arpeggiators get away from you; that is why I tend to use them only one or two at a time. When my VS finally leaves, the Cyclone will do for a long time, I think. I may eventually try out some software-based arpeggiators (I understand Logic has a nice one built in, and several Team members have built good ones in MAX), but for now just having one to work with is fine. I also rely heavily on loop sequencers like the MC-202, which of course are fully deterministic and don't tend to squash a production badly. As I recall, Clive, you own a copy of BALLISTIC, yes? Listen to "Spamming the Globe;" it's an example of Adam Schabtach and me pushing the envelope of what multiple arpeggiators can get away with. The base rhythm and bass sequence with resonance are preprogrammed, but everything else is multiple arpeggiators. mike -- choose your friends carefully-- your enemies will choose themselves for you ========================================================================== Mike Metlay ~ ATOMIC CITY ~ P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com = http://pd.net/atomic-city = All of our CDs can now be ordered directly from our WWW site, or by calling INFINITE ILLUSIONS: vox 904-385-6463 or 1-800-548-6724, or FAX 904-668-5825 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:56:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: roger king Subject: Re: computer composit -Reply >For those of us who just don't get it, there's a wonderful book you can >pick up that will further reinforce the supremacy of German Culture, and >the justification for intolerance against those scum which conspire to >dilute and deflect this culture from it's rightful destiny. That Book: "Mien >Kamp", by Adolf Hitler. Incidently, the author was a celebrated admirer of >Wagner. > >[Note to scum: you know who you are, watch out!] Since Wagner came well before Hitler I don't think "Mein Kampf" would be helpful. There is a good book that delves into Wagner's antisemitic traits: "The Real Wagner." Upon reading "The Real Wagner" one finds W's personality reflected the antisemitism that was prevelent in the culture of his day. The author points out that Wagner's patrons were jewish, even though Wagner openly cursed the jews. I can understand the way you feel about this subject, but it goes way beyond the twentieth century. Hitler and Himler cultivated the hatred of the have nots for the halves. It inspires one to think of what could happen in an America run by a David Duke or Lewis Farakhan. Being a New Englander transplanted to Indiana, this subject fascinates me. The state of Connecticut would never allow the Ku Klux Klan to hold a rally at the state house. Yet, here in Indiana there is no law to prevent it. There was no law to prevent Hitler to become Reichschancellor either. Please reply with this thought though: How would you use a synthesizer to symbolize the way you feel about the haters of this world? Roger King jollyroger@iquest.net swashbuckler of cybersonics ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:56:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: roger king Subject: Re: Composit (was..etc) Dear Todd: >>We could take four bars of a Rossini overture, loop them >>with a Proteus, have a rhythm machine pound out a >A Proteus doesn't sample, it just plays back pre-sampled sounds. Who said anything about sampling, Todd? I can sight read. Can you? >Are you a complete bigot, have you forgotten alt.Gabriel-era-Genesis and >alt.Collins-era-Genesis or alt.Styx or . . . . yawn. Does the question mark belong after "bigot" or "yawn?" >>If some dude came up with an interesting patch in 1878 >It was call an orchestra then. And they weren't programmable just trainable >monkeys playing dots on paper. Can you program anything close to the first 110 measures of "Parsifal," merely jamming until something "far out" pops into the mix? Even we "trainable monkeys" of "today" have trouble playing "Tristan And Isolde." And why is that? Because the composer took long walks for ten years cogitating over a way to bring God to earth through artistic expression. That, in my humble opinion, is worthy of discussion on an electronic music list. With a plate of SPAM please. (?) Roger King jollyroger@iquest.net swashbuckler of cybersonics ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 13:01:33 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Javier Galué Subject: Information?? **Hi, I have three days trying to find a e-mail address of Distributors of CD's and records in USA, Germany, Canada and in the rest of the world. I passed through several www pages but never reached the right information. If somebody is able to help me in this matter I'll thank you. / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Javier Galue galue@ven.net Caracas, Venezuela. / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Javier Galue galue@ven.net Caracas, Venezuela. / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:00:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: roger king Subject: Re: Save Our Shark >roger king writes-- >> >> Please advise me as to the amount the sound must be >>slowed down in order for the shark to sense the same DeBusey >>bliss my ears enjoy. > >I think my sense of humor still hasn't recovered from the recent >weeks of 20-hours days in the lab...this is a joke, right? > Dear Mike: There was a call for papers from U of Florida a while back. Psychoacoustics was one of the subjects they welcomed. While I was putting-in my twenty hours I did some lampoon type thinking on the subject. The later the hours got, the weirder became the lampooning possibilities. I know you work hard and take things extremely seriously when it comes to your earned leisure time. Please forgive me for not being more specific. I do have pet sharks. One of them does have a tendency to over-react to sounds of different sorts. But I didn't intend to rattle your cage, Mike. It's bad enough that the Pirates are leaving Pittsburgh. You don't need some Hoosier jerking you around. :) In the novel "The Remains Of The Day" Mr. Farraday tries to get Mr. Stevens to kid around with him. Farraday tells him about the fine American art of bantering. But, Mr. Stevens had just put in twenty hours polishing the silver. ;) Again, I apologize to you for any upset. Roger King jollyroger@iquest.net swashbuckler of cybersonics ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:00:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: roger king Subject: Re: modal horns -Reply >from R. King: > >The possible number of three chord combinations from these >"Holy" chords would be 17280, if repeats were allowed. >Is my math correct? > > >I calculate (12)*(12)*(12)=1728. > >-rob > Given: 7 modes: 12 keys: 12 chords, three ways chords and ways can repeat, since they can be played in other octaves. The modes and keys can not repeat, though the modulation possibilities could be brought in... I: I, IMAJ7, IMAJ9, IMAJ11 4! = 4*3*2*1 = 48 IV: IV, IVMAJ7, IVMAJ9, 3! = 3*2*1 = 6 V: V, V7 ,V9 ,V11 ,V13 5! = 5*4*3*2*1= 120 4! + 3! + 5! = 174 in any three chord combination: 174 * 3 = 522 Seven modes, each with 522 possible combinations, in twelve keys and eight octaves: 7*522= 3654 3654*12= 43848 If this is correct; and, if not, please give me a slap so I learn, then there are many ways to write bland jazz. :) Sorry for the original non-calculator example. ;) All of this is redundant since we received Marshall Tuttle's retort: the chordal clumps were not given consideration. An algorithmic program I use makes mighty interesting use of chordal clumps. :) To play them, you strike the keys with an open palm. Just spread your hand and press down anywhere. :) Cosima Liszt sat on the keyboards while Wagner's sequencer was recording. Her attempt to get the vile tempered composer's attention led to the invention of chordal clumps. :) Thanks, Rob. Roger King jollyroger@iquest.net swashbuckler of cybersonics ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:14:06 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: meaning inherent > I started to make music myself five years ago, and since then, I > sometimes think I ve lost the feeling to listen to music with my > heart; I m just listening to it with my brain - you know, structures, > sounds and things like that. The ability to let music "speak to me", > as Matt said it, seems to be gone and has reappeared quite seldom since then. Who has made similar experiences? Tell me about it, for I want to personally, i began serious study of music because i felt beethoven had too much power over me. school was only marginally useful in this process, as the current didactic ignores large parts of history as well as musical psychology etc. finally i understand how beethoven works, and i can analyze or surrender to it depending on which stance i choose to take at a given time. ultimately, one develops the ability to hear as a child again after a while, once the learning process has gone far enough. mt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:15:56 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: composit (was..et > Can you program anything close to the first 110 measures of "Parsifal," > merely jamming until something "far out" pops into the mix? Even > we "trainable monkeys" of "today" have trouble playing "Tristan AndIsolde." > And why is that? Because the composer took long walks for ten years > cogitating over a way to bring God to earth through artistic expression. > That, in my humble opinion, is worthy of discussion on an electronic > music list. very nicely said... in the end i think we will be left with the same old techniques for arranging our ideas. we abandon them at great risk of becoming terminally simple- minded. mt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 16:19:43 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: computer composit > >For those of us who just don't get it, there's a wonderful book you > can > >pick up that will further reinforce the supremacy of German > Culture, and > >the justification for intolerance against those scum which conspire > to > >dilute and deflect this culture from it's rightful destiny. That much drivel deleted.... actually, hitler's main ideas came from the gospel according to st. matthew (that stuff about the guilt falling upon us and our children) and a desire to "christianize" europe, which he almost succeeded in doing much to everyone's distress..... but that is another thread. point is, no one is blaming the religion for what was a religious idea. Wagner hired jewish conductors for almost all of his premieres. So evidently he and hitler must have disagreed to some extent. mt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 18:31:22 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Re: computer composit -Reply -Reply R. King writes: >How would you use a synthesizer to symbolize the way you feel about the haters of this world? Complex question. Using samplers one could fuze together the collective wailings and cries of the victims of this hate into an interactive aural documentary. The samples could be triggered by a "midi-compatible" polygraph device operating under the control of a neural network searching for the most graphic playback sequence as measured in the cummulative emotional response of each test subject. The net would learn/adapt both during each performance (learning what repulses the current subject) and across the lifetime of performances (what strategies generically work to repulse different subject types). Ineffective samples would be rooted out and discarded. As new samples became available, they would be incorporated into the sample database. Once the net had stabilized, the device could be used to screen subjects by their relative insensitivity to violence and pinpoint diviants with a propensity towards acting on their inner urges. Of course, Beethoven would have been suspect, since his deafness would preclude any reaction. But perhaps this cajoles another form of hate. Maybe, to borrow from Cage, a piece composed entirely of silence would be more appropriate. A sequence of notes, with wild pitch bends and modulations, patch changes, etc. all with midi volume set to zero. -rob ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 19:19:40 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Re: composit (was..et -Reply in the end i think we will be left with the same old techniques for arranging our ideas. we abandon them at great risk of becoming terminally simple- minded. I basically agree. But I also think we may be at the cusp of a paridigm change in the artistic creative process in general, and especially in technologically oriented media such as electronic music. The lone composer, picking his nose with one hand, scrawling with quill on manuscript with the other while holding the sustain pedal down may be a dying breed. Let's roughly compare the complexity of a steam engine design to that of a mature symphony. I would consider the introduction of a major innovation in either area to be a reasonable upper limit to the lifetime contribution of a single human working in isolation. Now let's talk an Apollo moon mission. No longer attributable to any single individual. Specialization and collaboration. Teams of teams. On the other hand... there has to be a tangible goal and an agreed upon framework for collaboration to proceed. The internet helps. It says, "so we now know we all really do exist, now what the f**k are we gonna do while we carry the torch?" The nightmare is that there will be alot of crap like, you know, a million guys simultaneously jammin' on "Autumn Leaves" as the Autumnal Equinox begins. On purpose. -rob p.s., that's September 23, guys. You guys in Australia get to sit it out. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 14:12:00 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: roger king Subject: Re: hemiola "...the hemiola: 3 2/4 groupings in a 3/4 tempo filling up two measures. Brahms was famous for this, but everybody did it." - Marshall Tuttle I'm doing volunteer notation scoring for the local Afro-American gospel record label. My next meeting with the label president is Tuesday, and I'd like to offer this as a way out of notational corners in the rhythm category. I take the keyboard track of their MID files and make printable lead sheets for the gospel singers. I'm going to ask the owner for permission to share some of the theoretical innovations I find in their sequences. Thanks for the term, Marshall. By the way, you and Eric Simon are my two favorite syndicated colomnists. :) Roger King jollyroger@iquest.net swashbuckler of cybersonics ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 02:42:01 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Crowl Subject: Re: computer composition inquiry In-Reply-To: On Thu, 5 Oct 1995, Matthew Ross Davis wrote: > At 8:33 PM 10/4/95, Spamboy wrote: > >I can in no way equate myself with the composers mentioned earlier in > >this thread (Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner (and I don't even like those > >composers. I'm more partial to Stravinsky, Ravel, and Prokofiev)) > > I find it amusing that you don't like these classical composers, and yet > you like the quintessential trio of neo-classical fellows influenced by two > (or at the very least one) of these composers. This is primarily to Spamboy, but I think everybody on E-MUSIC who hasn't heard Tomita's recordings should check them out. I've only been able to find his albums on vinyl, but a friend recently said she saw some CD re-releases of his in the store. (Please forgive me if you guys have already discussed him on this list...) Try to find his electronic version of Holst's THE PLANETS.\ --< mikey >-- /--------------------------------------------------------------\ | Michael Crowl LEO Sun, VIRGO Moon, LIBRA Rising... | | V/M (206)726-2591 E/M "SHITCAN@ESKIMO.COM" | | "The Scientist, like the Artist, is constantly | | faced with the problem: | | 'How do you organize and comprehend the World?'" | | (EINSTEIN SPACE & VAN GOGH SKY, by Leshan and Margenau) | \--------------------------------------------------------------/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 15:59:49 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Craig Marks Subject: Coda e-mail address I remember that there was some mention of Coda's e-mail address at AOL some months ago. I naively ignored it at the time because I wasn't having any problems with Finale but it's come back to bite me. Could somebody please repost the site? Has anybody else had problems running Finale on macs (especially LC or Performa machines)? My copy is running soooooooo slowly...I may have grandchildren before I complete a measure delete!!! :) Thanks for your help. -Craig ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 06:20:38 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: hemiola > I'm doing volunteer notation scoring for the local > Afro-American gospel record label. My next meeting > with the label president is Tuesday, and I'd like > to offer this as a way out of notational corners > in the rhythm category. you may be interested in a book by a fellow named Arom who studied african drumming rhythms in a very interesting way: he first taped an entire performance/session/whatever you want to call it, and then fitted each player with headphones to listen to the performance while he taped each player alone playing his part. this way he was able to build up scores of extremely complicated rhythmic polyphony, something which could never be done before. the scores are very interesting, especially in your line of work.... thanks for the compliment. mt ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 06:20:35 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: composit (was..et > Now let's talk an Apollo moon mission. No longer attributable to any > single individual. Specialization and collaboration. Teams of teams. this is an interesting thought, but there are several problems to this model: a) it is already in existence in china, where since the cultural revolution music has been written by committees - the result is predictably committee-like (maybe even a little better). it works, it sounds nice but... Beethoven it ain't. (you can download a number of files from www at the high energy institute in beijing). b) art in the industrial age has split into three concepts: art in the service of the power structure (as it was in agricultural societies serving the nobility and the church, only now it is serving corporations through advertising), art in service to the masses, i.e. pop culture and "the artist" as a symbol of the individual who is now the center of the economy (as opposed to the family in agricultural societies or the tribe in hunter-gatherer societies). collaboration is most likely to be a game rather than production of art at the level we are used to describing, since the paradigm is constantly shifting more and more towards isolation rather than cooperation. c) that art which currently survives and is most revered is that which is most penetrating in its insight and ability to invoke responses unaccessible to daily life. unfortunately we are dealing here with psychological archetypes of a very deep nature, which despite their universality are suffering in current society from a deficit of linguistic functions to express them. without that language it is questionable if artists will have so much to manipulate as they have in the past when there was general societal and cultural agreement about these things. in the current world, these depths are plumbed on an individual basis. how more than one person can successfully collaborate in such a context is not yet demonstrated. in the past writers and musicians collaborated, musicians shared there techniques one with another, but multiple composers have never produced anything successful. one model of interest is renga, a style of linked verses used in japanese poetry which was written by several persons at a single sitting. even if todays musicians could do such a thing, how many of them given the chance would go home and edit their work in the same way? mt ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 21:33:54 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Todd Eric Moore Subject: Re: Composit (was..etc) You wrote: > >Dear Todd: >>>We could take four bars of a Rossini overture, loop them >>>with a Proteus, have a rhythm machine pound out a >>A Proteus doesn't sample, it just plays back pre-sampled sounds. > >Who said anything about sampling, Todd? I can sight read. Can you? Yes, not great, but I can. > >>Are you a complete bigot, have you forgotten alt.Gabriel-era-Genesis and >>alt.Collins-era-Genesis or alt.Styx or . . . . yawn. > >Does the question mark belong after "bigot" or "yawn?" You were concluding that is all I considered electronic music was these groups of the progressive genere. > >>>If some dude came up with an interesting patch in 1878 >>It was call an orchestra then. And they weren't programmable just trainable >>monkeys playing dots on paper. > >Can you program anything close to the first 110 measures of "Parsifal," Yes I could; however, life is to short to reiterate the music of others and I can't afford an orchestra to play such pieces for me. Perhaps you are working as a music professor and can afford such time to these endeavors. The rest of us have to pay rent and put food on the table. >merely jamming until something "far out" pops into the mix? Even What's wrong with improvisation and, perhaps, 'improvisational composition?' >we "trainable monkeys" of "today" have trouble playing "Tristan And Isolde." My reference to trained monkeys is this. I have met very well trained classical musicans who can read and play extremely well etc. However, they can't compose original music. Whereas, I have met people, living ordinary lives, pick up instruments for pleasure and compose great pieces of music. Therefore, the accumulation of mental and physical skills to play an instrument does not guarantee one of the ability to compose. To further illuminate the point, should we say people who can not program computers should be precluded from using them? >And why is that? Because the composer took long walks for ten years >cogitating over a way to bring God to earth through artistic expression. >That, in my humble opinion, is worthy of discussion on an electronic >music list. It worked for him. > >With a plate of SPAM please. (?) >Roger King >jollyroger@iquest.net > >swashbuckler of cybersonics > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 14:39:08 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: AFCMidi@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Coda e-mail address --PART.BOUNDARY.0.27023.mail02.mail.aol.com.813695947 Content-ID: <0_27023_813695947@mail02.mail.aol.com.1690> Content-type: text/plain Here is the email address to coda along with the email addresses to over 70 others companies in the music/software industry David Hunt AFC Midi Apple Forum Consultant Mac, Music, and Sound, America Online --PART.BOUNDARY.0.27023.mail02.mail.aol.com.813695947 Content-ID: <0_27023_813695947@mail02.mail.aol.com.1691> Content-type: text/plain; name="Music industry address list" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable FOR BEST VIEWING RESULTS MAKE THIS WINDOW LARGER BY DRAGGING THE SQUARE IN THE BOTTOM LEFT HAND OF CORNER TO THE RIGHT The following is a list containing E-mail addresses and in most cases = person in which to contact at many of todays music companies. Advanced Gravis Advanced Gravis@aol.com Animotion 71333.1154@compuserve.com Eric Vicke= ry = Asystem 72662.143@compuserve.com Scott Ke= ndall AVM Technology 72662.160@compuserve.com Chia Chen Tsao= BeBop Systems 74431.3616@compuserve.com Big Noise 75300.2470@compuserve.com Richard = Johnson BinarySounds/Hybrid 75300.3331@compuserve.com Stefan Daystrom Blue Ribbon 72662.352@compuserve.com Brian Tho= mas Coda Music Tech. 75300.3727@compuserve.com Eric (Windows= Support) Coda Music Tech. 75300.3727@compuserve.com Scott (Mac Su= pport) Coda Music Tech. Coda Music Tech.@aol.com CODATECH= Cool Shoes Software 75300.3435@compuserve.com Russ Kozerski Digidesign 74774.3122@compuserve.com Dr. T's 71154.346@compuserve.com Joe Tru= e DrumTrax 71333.3674@compuserve.com Valentine M= isuraca Dynaware USA Dynaware USA@aol.com E-mu Systems 75300.1540@compuserve.com Mark Camp Electronic Courseware Electronic Courseware@aol.com Ensoniq 74777.2412@compuserve.com - Multimed= ia Ensoniq 76702.2072@compuserve.com - Musical I= nstruments Eventide 75300.2463@compuserve.com Gil Griff= ith Fostex 74431.2006@compuserve.com Fostex Corp. Fostex Corp.@aol.com Ste= veC4040 or CrawfordZ Howling Dog 71333.2166@compuserve.com Eric Bell Innovative Qual SW 71154.347@compuserve.com Thomas Stewart Innovative Qual SW 72745.1307@compuserve.com Jim McMurray Invisible Touch 72662.3075@compuserve.com J L Cooper J L Cooper@aol.com JLC= Rick JLCooper 75300.1373@compuserve.com Chuck Thomp= son Korg Korg@aol.com = JazzGuitar Kurzweil Music Systems Kurzweil Music Systems@aol.com Lexicon 71333.434@compuserve.com Mike DeJa= don Live Sound! 71333.1707@compuserve.com Jon Curtis Magnetic Music 76711.463@compuserve.com Slim Heilpern Mark IV Pro Audio 72662.263@compuserve.com Ivan Schwartz Mark of the Unicorn 71333.3666@compuserve.com Neal Lischner MediaTriX 74774.1335@compuserve.com MIDI Solutions 72662.140@compuserve.com John Fast Midiman 75300.3434@compuserve.com George Van = Wagner MTI 72662.1106@compuserve.com Ron Stein= Music Quest 75300.2770@compuserve.com David Rowe Musicator 74431.40@compuserve.com Steve Nichols= on Musicware 75162.433@compuserve.com Musitek 71333.3723@compuserve.com Chris Newell= Opcode 76004.2156@compuserve.com Aron Nelson Opcode Systems Opcode Systems@aol.com OpcodeS OSC 72662.262@compuserve.com Thomas Di= Muzio OSC OSC@aol.com = JermBey = Passport Designs Passport Designs@aol.com Passport Designs 71333.1433@compuserve.com Bret Lee Peavey Peavey@aol.com La= rryM 4PV PG Music 75300.2750@compuserve.com Peter Gannon REP Magazine 75300.3142@compuserve.com Tim Sadler Roland Corp. 72662.376@compuserve.com RolandTech Sonic Foundry 74774.1340@compuserve.com Sound Deals 72662.135@compuserve.com Jamie Robertso= n Soundcraft 71333.2423@compuserve.com David Kimm Soundscape Dig Tech 74774.1337@compuserve.com Steinberg/Jones 71333.2447@compuserve.com Greg Ondo Sweetwater Sound 71333.523@compuserve.com Chuck Surack TAP Music Systems 71333.1275@compuserve.com Bryant Mason Tech Star Services 72662.353@compuserve.com Thoughtprocessors 71154.351@compuserve.com Stephen Dydo Tran Tracks 74431.3565@compuserve.com Turtle Beach 71333.2432@compuserve.com Evan Twelve Tone 74774.1773@compuserve.com Deb Rogowski Voyetra 76702.2037@compuserve.com Voyetra Technologies Voyetra Technologies@aol.com Waves 74774.517@compuserve.com WinJammer Software 72662.3021@compuserve.com Dan McKee YC/Kurzweil 75300.2272@compuserve.com David Fox= --PART.BOUNDARY.0.27023.mail02.mail.aol.com.813695947-- ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 15:48:43 GMT Reply-To: jetman@tunanet.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: jetman Organization: tunanet Subject: Re: meaning inherent Comments: To: homer!AMERICAN.EDU!EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU mt writes: >finally i understand how beethoven works, and i can analyze or surrender to it depending on which stance i choose to take at a given time. ultimately, one develops the ability to hear as a child again after a while, once the learning process has gone far enough. > wow, i wish i understood how beethoven works. i mean i do know about sonata structures and key relationships and thematic development, etc., but the late quartets and piano sonatas are from another world. i think he pushed it as far as you can while still holding it all together as a unified piece. his late works are post-modern in their event clashes and formal designs. and several of these are at the bursting point of comprehension, but they work every time emotionally, and yes sometimes with child-like simplicity. Jeff Talman jetman@tunanet.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 15:07:44 -0600 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Tuttle Organization: Torii Station 30Gig online at 405-733-7083 Subject: Re: composit (was..et > My reference to trained monkeys is this. I have met very well > trained classical musicans who can read and play extremely well etc. > However, they can't compose original music. so what? i have met loads of hacks/amateurs who are musically illiterate and proud of it saying this same thing. (i am even related to some who are attempting to build musical careers on it). did it ever occur to any of you that the entire business of music as you know it would not exist today, and you would all be pounding on trees if it weren't for those people who study and keep alive the achievements of the millenia that make it possible for you to pound on synthesizers instead? > Whereas, I have met people, living ordinary lives, pick up > instruments for pleasure and compose great pieces of music. great? do you mean great like wow! super-duper! etc. or do you mean great like something that will move millions of people and affect the development of society and culture for generations to come? true, anybody can compose. true anybody can play an instrument. it is a good thing that more amateurs are getting involved now in music because of this, (much like musical life in the 18th century). however: a bunch of illiterate amateurs are not now and never are going to be great. face it, enjoy yourselves but put up the self righteous anti-intellectual attitude. if it in fact wins out in the end you are not going to want to be part of the resulting social decay.... mt ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 16:27:22 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: glinert@CS.RPI.EDU Subject: ASSETS'96 Deadline Near! Comments: To: AUDIO-L%ITESMVF1.bitnet@cmsa.berkeley.edu, AUDITORY@vm1.mcgill.ca, Music-Research@comlab.ox.ac.uk, SYNTH-L@american.edu, anita@mitvma.mit.edu, craig@well.sf.ca.us, dasp-l%csearn.bitnet@cmsa.berkeley.edu, dgl@sonic.com, everyone@ccrma.stanford.edu, fish@musclefish.com, fisher@mitvma.mit.edu, frm@ucsd.edu, hearing-seminar@apple.com, icma@umich.edu, js%timbre.uucp@nbn.com, lhorton@mitvma.mit.edu, mcleod@mitvma.mit.edu, minsky@MEDIA-LAB.MEDIA.MIT.edu, mla-l%iubvm.bitnet@cmsa.berkeley.edu, msimoni@umich.edu, muscom@mills.edu, music-research-request@cattell.psych.upenn.edu, notmus-l%ubvm.bitnet@cmsa.berkeley.edu, rww@sgi.com, ssys@netcom.com, studer@applelink.apple.com, timis@opcode.com, users@cnmat.cnmat.berkeley.edu, willy@dgp.toronto.edu Reminder - Deadline Approaching!! ================================= >>> ASSETS '96 <<< The 2nd ACM/SIGCAPH Conference on Assistive Technologies April 11-12, 1996 / Waterfront Center Hotel / Vancouver, Canada ======================================================================= The deadline for submissions is this coming TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1995 ======================================================================= For more information, send e-mail to the conference general chair: glinert@cs.rpi.edu to the conference program chair: jaffe@roses.stanford.edu Or consult the conference web page: http://www.cs.rpi.edu/assets ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 17:36:55 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Ian Tilbury Subject: Time to re-focus At 3:07 PM 10/14/95, Marshall Tuttle wrote: One post too many. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 18:52:27 GMT Reply-To: jetman@tunanet.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: jetman Organization: tunanet Subject: Re: Coda e-mail address Comments: To: homer!AMERICAN.EDU!EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU David- Thanks for sharing that list of music/software company addresses and contacts, it will really come in handy. Jeff Talman jetman@tunanet.com