========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 10:12:57 PDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Fred MoTTe Subject: Re: Underground >Please educate me on the definition of module music. >Somebody said: >> It's a cool place, dedicated to underground module music, pretty > awesome. >Then Nick asked: >> What's underground module music? >And Fred MoTTe responded: >> Well, go and check by yourself ;) Modules are sample based musics made >> on Amiga or PC computer, with software like Soundtracker, Protracker, >> Fastracker, Screamtracker... This is not midi stuff. No synths are >> used. ...At least, I suppose that's what was called "underground >> module music" in the previous message... >So underground module music is defined entirely by the methods and tools >used to create it and not at all by the characteristics of the music >itself? No. Actually, methods and tools only define the term "module". >Is there any relationship between underground music and underground >module music? The only things that makes the modules a bit underground, is that these musics are made for a certain audience, which is mostly composed of computer fanatics more than music fans. But this tend to be less and less underground, as more and more people are aware of this type of music files (and that's not a bad thing after all !). The variety of modules you can find vary from dance to death metal, from techno to finnish folk music ... The first commercial use of these module musics was for computer video games (mostly on Amiga and PC). >In my day, underground had a certain meaning. If I apply that meaning >to the phrase "underground music," then I would conclude that it would >no longer be underground music the instant you played it for anybody >who wasn't in your underground movement. ;-) The computer fanatics I talked about are a kind of underground movement. I don't know if anybody knows what we call computer "demos", but all the people from this demo scene, who collect modules, are part of this "underground" movement (if you really don't know what I'm talking about, it must be a bit underground then... ;) Fred. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 08:39:26 CST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: harry haecker Subject: Re: Keyboard size >Bach's keyboard was only 4 octaves long: that should be enough for >anyone.[..] Anyone, that is, who only wants to play Baroque or other music which requires only 48 notes...much of Debussy would be unaccessable, for example. Also, some people like to zone their keyboards, which, I guess Bach could do with his multi-rank organ, but not within the same rank. Ain't technology peachy-keen? :-) Harry Haecker (haeckerh@nwrc.gov) ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 09:38:41 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Dave Rosborough Subject: Re: Keyboard size >>Bach's keyboard was only 4 octaves long: that should be enough for >>anyone.[..] > >Anyone, that is, who only wants to play Baroque or other music which >requires only 48 notes...much of Debussy would be unaccessable, for >example. Also, some people like to zone their keyboards, which, I >guess Bach could do with his multi-rank organ, but not within the >same rank. Ain't technology peachy-keen? :-) Of course, we could argue that it depends which of Bach's keyboards we're talking about... You're right about clavichords and probably most of his organs, but I'm betting his harpsichords were a bit bigger (as evidenced by the Italian Concerto, which takes ME more than 4 octaves to play, anyways...) TTYL DaveR _____________________________________________________________ David Rosborough Web Author, Database Designer @ Faculty of Education, SFU Apple Education Consultant @ SFU drosboro@sfu.ca http://www.educ.sfu.ca/people/DavidR/ _____________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 10:30:55 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Timothy Kelly Subject: Re: Keyboard size Hi All, Mainly, I just use one of those $9.95 mini key 3 octave Reveal MusisStar toys. The octave switch goes up or down 9 octaves, so that takes care of most of my keyboard playing needs. I think Bach would have liked all the current gismos. Its not the size of your keyboard, its what you do with it. Happy Emusic 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, 7 Jun 1996 11:52:09 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nathanael W Berry Subject: Re: Best Equipment At 01:00 AM 6/7/96 -0400, you wrote: >I'd like some advice as to the best keyboard synth currently available for >$999 US. I am involved with a project to bring this technology into a high >school music program which has no previous experience with synths A lot of good suggestions have been posted. You might want to contact the manufacturers of the products suggested. They may provide you with a special discount or a purchase program, particularly if it could lead to further purchases! Good Luck Nate ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 20:04:45 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Best Equipment >Seriously look into the Alesis QS6. It is only a 61 key keyboard but the >rest of the specs are phenominal: This all tends to be very subjective. The specs. you print don't strike me as very phenomenal at all: 640 onboard patches? MIDI in/out/thru? Stereo output? Headphones? >When I went out shopping & comparing >everybody I talked too about comparing the QS6 with any other brand said >there was nothing on the market that even comes close in comparison. Oh, the Wavestation, the K2500, the VL-1, the MicroWave, the Morpheus all eclipse the QS6, and are in turn eclipsed by it. A second-hand WS or a Morpheus would come under $1000 and offer a much more educational synthesis architecture. Then again, for educational purposes you could pick up a DX7 and a Juno-106. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 15:21:38 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jacky Schreiber Subject: Re: Best Equipment ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB5487.A708A3A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- De: John Krikawa[SMTP:JKRIKAWA@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU] Enviado: Jueves 6 de Junio de 1996 12:28 PM Para: Multiple recipients of list EMUSIC-L Asunto: Re: Best Equipment "Bacil C. Warren" : >Hello to all users: > >I'd like some advice as to the best keyboard synth currently available for >$999 US. I am involved with a project to bring this technology into a high Could you please discuss this over on SYNTH-L? It doesn't seem to belong here. Thanks, -john jkrikawa@ccit.arizona.edu -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- I agree!! jacky schreiber jackysch@ven.net ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB5487.A708A3A0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IhwTAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAENgAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBJAG ADgBAAABAAAADAAAAAMAADADAAAACwAPDgAAAAACAf8PAQAAAFQAAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDd AQ9UAgAAAABFbGVjdHJvbmljIE11c2ljIERpc2N1c3Npb24gTGlzdABTTVRQAEVNVVNJQy1MQEFN RVJJQ0FOLkVEVQAeAAIwAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AAzABAAAAFgAAAEVNVVNJQy1MQEFNRVJJ Q0FOLkVEVQAAAAMAFQwBAAAAAwD+DwYAAAAeAAEwAQAAACMAAAAnRWxlY3Ryb25pYyBNdXNpYyBE aXNjdXNzaW9uIExpc3QnAAACAQswAQAAABsAAABTTVRQOkVNVVNJQy1MQEFNRVJJQ0FOLkVEVQAA AwAAOQAAAAALAEA6AQAAAAIB9g8BAAAABAAAAAAAAAO3OQEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNyb3NvZnQg TWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQSAAQATAAAAUkU6IEJlc3QgRXF1aXBtZW50AFcGAQWAAwAOAAAAzAcGAAcA DwAVACYABQAvAQEggAMADgAAAMwHBgAHAA8AFQADAAUADAEBCYABACEAAAA1MUMxODc2NjYwQzBD RjExOUM5QTQ0NDU1MzU0MDAwMADRBgEDkAYAgAQAABIAAAALACMAAQAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAEA AAADADYAAAAAAEAAOQDAyKWMplS7AR4AcAABAAAAEwAAAFJFOiBCZXN0IEVxdWlwbWVudAAAAgFx AAEAAAAWAAAAAbtUpoycZofBUsBgEc+cmkRFU1QAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8M AQAAABEAAABqYWNreXNjaEB2ZW4ubmV0AAAAAAMABhCtnVHlAwAHEMwBAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAAAt LS0tLS0tLS0tREU6Sk9ITktSSUtBV0FTTVRQOkpLUklLQVdBQENDSVRBUklaT05BRURVRU5WSUFE TzpKVUVWRVM2REVKVU5JT0RFMTk5NjEyOjI4UE1QQVJBOk1VTFRJUExFAAAAAAIBCRABAAAACwMA AAcDAAA2BQAATFpGdUmHNc3/AAoBDwIVAqgF6wKDAFAC8gkCAGNoCsBzZXQyNwYABsMCgzIDxQIA cHJCcRHic3RlbQKDM3cC5AcTAoB9CoAIzwnZO/EWDzI1NQKACoENsQtgwG5nMTAzNAr7FFE1C/Jj AEAgCoUKi2xpCDE4MALRaS0xNJ40DfAM0BzTC1kxNgqg6wNgE9BjBUAtHvcKhx2rwwwwHnZEZTog IcIdj0MelAyCIEpvaAOgSwEFEGthd2FbU00AVFA6SktSSUsAQVdBQENDSVQELkElEFpPTkEuMEVE VV0fnyCtRW7ydgcwZG8hsCIfIyoKUHJ2B5E2IA2wKtEDAG8RK2IxOTkrUDEyOmAyOCBQTSafIK1Q HQrAYSGyKS8jKU11bNp0BSBsK4AWEGMFIAiQ4wIwBCBvZiAcMBPAKICATVVTSUMtTC0P6SCtQXMr sHQo8SHfIu2aUiGhQgeQKHFxdQUgzweAAjAa/xwDMzYddxpFGR52IkIA0AMRQy4gBlcKwBYQbiIg PEEEenMIYHRoQEFPgEwuQ09NPjoKhVA+SGVsFaAgNcAgewdAAyB1EbARoD5XPmZJ9CdkMqFrK4A9 cAeAP2D6ZCiwY0HRBCA/QT2gK4B2YjhSQXB5BuALEUGQeTECMGggYwhwPPF0bPp5P2B2C3ALYAJg K4ACEMpyPmYkLEA5IDMgPKDSST9gbSALgHYG8CsQp0EwA/BEEWEgHnFqHrL9P0FiBRAZEEKxBAA/ MAWQuyPwFZFnRMALgD9CIEkwrGdoOSwIUWxBMHkIYO9IADGgQmArgGQEAERABBE9SSNvKxAFwAIg BgBZTtRUSDNgPzXwSQVAKOD5B5BuJwVAEbAT4D8xCoVfQwAVoEjxQtAWEC45LFQhEYBua3MsCoUt apMj4QqFamskNEBjMfAkdC4KwGl6AiBhLj0JgHU5LDmfOq4asi0un1hPWNYKhUbBCcIhIVWMWmoA 0GtEwATwaBYQaS9DAEWmW9NcMUArEG4uvm4RwDq/HpQKhRUxAGBQAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAABA AAcwAImhd6ZUuwFAAAgwAImhd6ZUuwEeAD0AAQAAAAUAAABSRTogAAAAAOI3 ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB5487.A708A3A0-- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 15:37:16 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jacky Schreiber Subject: Re: exchange ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB5487.B31D9880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ---------- De: Andrew Whittle. AWhit.[SMTP:Andysmoke@AOL.COM] Enviado: Mi=E9rcoles 5 de Junio de 1996 16:34 PM Para: Multiple recipients of list EMUSIC-L Asunto: Re: exchange In a message dated 04/06/96 23:27:48, you write: >Anyone on this list interested in exchanging his/her own music CD for = one of >mine? >Is there any place on the web where one can post info about one's CD = for >exchange/sale >for free?? > >thank you all >jacky schreiber Well that depends on where your from and what you've got to exchange. I = am interested. Is it computer programs or audio CD's you want to exchange. = Oh, and if anyone has the addresses for any exchange sites, please let me = know too. Thanks in advance, Andy W. Andysmoke@aol.com -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. For anyone intersted I'm from Venezuela (yes! South America). The item = for exchange is an audio CD. thanks jacky schreiber jackysch@ven.net ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB5487.B31D9880 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IjATAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAENgAQAAgAAAAIAAgABBJAG AOwDAAACAAAAFAAAAAMAADAFAAAACwAPDgAAAAACAf8PAQAAAFQAAAAAAAAAgSsfpL6jEBmdbgDd AQ9UAgAAAABFbGVjdHJvbmljIE11c2ljIERpc2N1c3Npb24gTGlzdABTTVRQAEVNVVNJQy1MQEFN RVJJQ0FOLkVEVQAeAAIwAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AAzABAAAAFgAAAEVNVVNJQy1MQEFNRVJJ Q0FOLkVEVQAAAB4AGgABAAAAFAAAAFJFUE9SVC5JUE0uTk9URS5ORFIAQAAyAGBtoKqoVLsBAwAE DAAAAAADAAUM/////wMAFQwAAAAQAwD+DwYAAAAeAAEQAQAAAE8AAABObyBoYXkgcHJvdmVlZG9y IGRlIHRyYW5zcG9ydGUgZGlzcG9uaWJsZSBwYXJhIGxhIGVudHJlZ2EgYSBlc3RlIGRlc3RpbmF0 YXJpby4AAB4AATABAAAAIwAAACdFbGVjdHJvbmljIE11c2ljIERpc2N1c3Npb24gTGlzdCcAAAIB CzABAAAAGwAAAFNNVFA6RU1VU0lDLUxAQU1FUklDQU4uRURVAAADAAA5AAAAAAIBEjoBAAAAVAAA AAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAEVsZWN0cm9uaWMgTXVzaWMgRGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBMaXN0 AFNNVFAARU1VU0lDLUxAQU1FUklDQU4uRURVAB4AEzoBAAAAIwAAACdFbGVjdHJvbmljIE11c2lj IERpc2N1c3Npb24gTGlzdCcAAAIBFDoBAAAAGwAAAFNNVFA6RU1VU0lDLUxAQU1FUklDQU4uRURV AAALAEA6AQAAAAIB9g8BAAAABAAAAAAAAAUOAAAAAwAAMAYAAAALAA8OAQAAAAIB/w8BAAAAVAAA AAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAEVsZWN0cm9uaWMgTXVzaWMgRGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBMaXN0 AFNNVFAARU1VU0lDLUxAQU1FUklDQU4uRURVAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgADMAEAAAAW AAAARU1VU0lDLUxAQU1FUklDQU4uRURVAAAAHgAaAAEAAAAIAAAASVBNLk5PVEUDABUMAQAAAAMA /g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAjAAAAJ0VsZWN0cm9uaWMgTXVzaWMgRGlzY3Vzc2lvbiBMaXN0JwAAAgEL MAEAAAAbAAAAU01UUDpFTVVTSUMtTEBBTUVSSUNBTi5FRFUAAAMAADkAAAAAAgEUOgEAAAAQAAAA ScGHZmDAzxGcmkRFU1QAAAsAQDoBAAAAAgH2DwEAAAAEAAAAAAAABmjWAQiABwAYAAAASVBNLk1p Y3Jvc29mdCBNYWlsLk5vdGUAMQgBBIABAA0AAABSRTogZXhjaGFuZ2UANAQBBYADAA4AAADMBwYA BwAPACUAEAAFACkBAQYABwAYAAAASVBNLk1pY3Jvc29mdCBNYWlsLk5vdGUAMQgBIIADAA4AAADM BwYABwAPAAEADAAFAAEBAQmAAQAhAAAANDlDMTg3NjY2MEMwQ0YxMTlDOUE0NDQ1NTM1NDAwMDAA 2AYBA5AGAEgFAAATAAAACwAjAAEAAAADACYAAAAAAAsAKQABAAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkAYOyNu6hU uwEeAHAAAQAAAA0AAABSRTogZXhjaGFuZ2UAAAAAAgFxAAEAAAAWAAAAAbtUo/sQZofBSsBgEc+c mkRFU1QAAAAAHgAeDAEAAAAFAAAAU01UUAAAAAAeAB8MAQAAABEAAABqYWNreXNjaEB2ZW4ubmV0 AAAAAAMABhCTbUJmAwAHEMoCAAAeAAgQAQAAAGUAAAAtLS0tLS0tLS0tREU6QU5EUkVXV0hJVFRM RUFXSElUU01UUDpBTkRZU01PS0VAQU9MQ09NRU5WSUFETzpNSelSQ09MRVM1REVKVU5JT0RFMTk5 NjE2OjM0UE1QQVJBOk1VTFRJAAAAAAIBCRABAAAAugMAALYDAAD4BgAATFpGdXrzof//AAoBDwIV AqgF6wKDAFAC8gkCAGNoCsBzZXQyNwYABsMCgzIDxQIAcHJCcRHic3RlbQKDM3cC5AcTAoB9CoAI zwnZO/EWDzI1NQKACoENsQtgwG5nMTAzNAr7FFE1C/JjAEAgCoUKi2xpCDE4MALRaS0xNJ40DfAM 0BzTC1kxNgqg6wNgE9BjBUAtHvcKhx2rwwwwHnZEZTogIcIdj2celAyCFLBuZBYQB+BXxGhpAkBs ZS4UsCRCgC5bU01UUDoj0QMTsARga2VAQU9MYC5DT01dH58grUXkbnYHMGRvIbAiHyMpwk0AoCdl OXIVgQeRRDUgDbAgSnUDAG8hK+IxOTk2LKA2OrEZUCBQTSa/IK1QCsCOYSGyKU8qWnVsdAUg9SSQ IBYQYwUgCJACMAQgOG9mIBwwE8AooE1VYFNJQy1MLY8grUG6cywwdCkRId8i7VIhoWxleBFxGRBl Gv8cAzMuNh13GkUedkkDoGEgWQeBc2E5ICvgYRPQZIAgMDQvMDYvLNEAIDIzOjI3OjSQOCwgeQhg IHcFELUT0Do5TD4j0D6wbiwA+QIgIHQkUAQgMzMLgBPQPxYQE8E9UAuAOLYLgGcgWUDxL2gEkDLw dwOgbYJ1AJBjIENEIAIQK0NxQIJmP8ZtC4BlP30/xkkEIEDgQbE8YEBQIE0LUWNAlSwAd2UjsHfL RpNAcmMDkXBvQVMCENs8YAbgdQVAQHEnBCBENPs/xjjGLzzAJJA/xkRiA1C9CeA/Rcc/xkDgAHBr PqPVB0BsP8ZqANBrRwAE8DJoFhBpYgSQOUxXZa9O8EDRPSAr4XAJ8GQy4f8DoEg0PrFMwgNwRtE9 UEgw01HRPrEndiwAZx6QQNDfLGA4xiSwPDA8YG0KhUGI31WiBCAkYEjAA3BwSeBDYR8ecQnAVfAy 4QXAYXVkPyxRRDBKQT6zAHBU3k9o/iwKhVOyBpBG0kByEYBGY/08YGQj8QQQB5FEYkbiOMb7T+A/ EXM+kDIRXLAsACSQ4wVAB4Aga25DkAqFNkB0by45TFROUldhPFFk/nYAcEdQW0YlkiQwYQYlmDph BvAuV7E0DRpJLS7vZx9oL2j6CoVGXdRAckGDWUHjSSdTkFNjVgnwZUZ6ClALYCAoeQeQIXsGAEnR aBSwB4AFEEjQKf8ksGHwaxET0URTXkcEAFtX/1j3YQY63x6UcR8aZ05Db9aXT591GE/xQFSAbi5A gH50cY9ynTpPeE8KoxUxAAF8cAAAAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAEAABzDAM7Sxo1S7AUAACDDAM7Sx o1S7AQIBFDoBAAAAEAAAAEnBh2ZgwM8RnJpERVNUAAAeAD0AAQAAAAUAAABSRTogAAAAAMaR ------ =_NextPart_000_01BB5487.B31D9880-- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 14:03:24 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Ron Hillman Subject: Re: Best Equipment >>Seriously look into the Alesis QS6. >Morpheus would come under $1000 and offer a much more educational synthesis >architecture. Then again, for educational purposes you could pick up a DX7 >and a Juno-106. > > Or a Arp Odyssey, and a Korg M1 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 23:33:59 +0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Juan Manuel Rodriguez C." Subject: Re: New Yamaha soundcards for PC ? In-Reply-To: <960529140616_206152604@emout08.mail.aol.com> On Wed, 29 May 1996, Andrew Whittle. AWhit. wrote: > In a message dated 28/05/96 08:34:11, you write: > > >Hello, > > > >I'm going to buy a new soundcard for my PC and would like to know which one > >is the most valuable card in terms of quality of sounds and versatility of > >use. AWE32 which isn't comparable with > >almost any soundmodule . get rid of it, > >Is there any other card you would recommend? > Well excuse me if I'm wrong, you have an AWE32, but are thinking of buying an > SB16 compatible. I do agree that the AWE32 is not a brilliant wave-table > card, but since Creative-Labs are the industry leaders (!!!!)in sound cards (and > the industry standard), everyone thinks their cards are the best on the > market. Also very expensive. ...... I have an Ensoniq > Soundscape Elite card, which is fairly expensive, but has great sampling and > playback quality. I have not yet heard the Yamaha cards, but know> > Andy W. (England) > (WELL , I CUTTED-WOUNDED THE ORIGINAL TEXT) Wait a minute, you're judging Sound Blaster AWE 32 WT cards, but based on what I've read, Sblaster company owns (or subsidiary....) E-MU Enterprises, then I'd like to know if it's real (....SoundBlaster's official guide) that E-MU puts out the worldwide WT-technology standard or better it leads the WT technology, ..... if so, that'd mean that SoundBlaster WT cards are better than Yamaha, Roland , and others, and SB should really be an standard in that cards... But before goin' sleep I've another question I've been sighting on an Alesis QS6 Keyboard (nvr touchd by me ....) it has 8 megas of sampled waveforms , that means the WTable part..... also 640 programs, does it means synth programs?, and about modern forms of synth programs, are they always based on the FM technology>? (they say samples are "linear" and uncompressed, at 16 bits//) things I doNT KNow what're: 500 mixes? , mixes of what .... timbres or rythm patterns..? , and 64 voice poliphony, what's radically the poliphony on a keyboard with samples and also a synth, wouldn't poly be relative, I mean that if synthesis can be 1 or 2 or 3 or 4... operators and anyway any synth program (patch) spent a note of the total poly, more over, if poly applies to samples, a sample can be both a note or a chord, if you've a sampler like an Akai*.* does it have a restricted poly, how many waves can be being "scanned" at the same time..... My brain's getting fuzzzzzy, ah uh- the actual synthesizer really have FM cells or they're just software emulations of those cells. Good bye, hope it's not been to " poly-mic " ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 03:16:28 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Bacil C. Warren" Subject: Re: Best Equipment, Thanks & oops! Comments: To: gbelder@gnn.com To all who responded to my inquiry: Thanks for your great help. I have talked to some manufacturers reps, but like to have other sources and ideas for balance. As far as SYNTH-L is concerned, I was unaware of its existance until now. I apologize if I stepped on any toes. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 07:20:50 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Andrew Whittle. AWhit." Subject: Re: New Yamaha soundcards for PC ? Well Sound Blasters are good cards, and they sell a lot. Mainly because they are good quality for the price and have been accepted by many Hardware and Software manufacturers. Adlib made the first PC-Sound card capable of making more than beeps, but much later, Creative Labs brought out the Sound Blaster 2.0, which was 8bit and way ahead of its time. These sold very well, and so Cretive went on to develop better quality cards. This has made them what they are today! But they only have two wave-table cards, the AWE32 full-version and the AWE32 light (or whatever they call it in USA). Both these cards are fairly good and cheap for what they are, but the quality is not as good as some of the other makes, eg. Turtle Beach, Roland, Ensoniq, Korg, etc. But for these cards, you have to pay much more and are really only for composers and developers. Later, Andy W. (Wirral, England) Andysmoke@aol.com ----------------------------------------- Don't be so open minded or your brains will fall out! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 10:11:36 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Dominikus Forcht <100142.2656@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Bach-composing The vision: "Composing like Bach, Haydn, Mozart, .... but rather with thousand than with 12 tones per octave...." This is a pointer to a research project with a working title like: USE OF THE HARMONIC SERIES. The intended result could be (as a summary): Each PC that is equipped with a sound card in a certain quality, becomes a production system for new music, just if the PC is improved with an additional "composition card plus software". The PC-user d o n o t n e e d t o l e a r n notes, harmonies and/or musical instruments. He only serves the PC or a similar computer. I have developed a self organizing prinziple of the harmonics, to use these to create tunes and sounds. I mentioned Bach etc. because of the almost forgotten kind of work to compose. Once, the "construction" within the scale of twelve-part-octaves was "primary" and "musically feeling" to the constructions was developed by generations of listeners in the following centuries. We should try a similar new way if we want to break out of the twelve-part-octaves (I think we should want). It is well-known that each audible work exists "musically" only in cultural consents of the society. But so far as a consent resulting from the interval scale of twelve-part-octaves, we have an opportunity to improve our musicality with opening understanding of cultural consents. The general harmonic series can be easy identified as the very early principle of orders in perception. In this case, many of questions occur to the musician as well as to the physicist and the scientist. Should not we try to suggest a new cultural consent on a universal basis? I has been engaged on this matter long time and should like to have communication now. The keywords are: "Musically perception" (starting in the very early evolution), "Digital sound generation", "PC-software for composition", (the succession is unimportant). Let me introduce with following statements: When an individual makes sounds and other noise by oneself and without a special aim or when he produces such sounds and noise by means of tools, this is usually done for test and reflection purposes. But what then is "music"? Among all the answers to this question are but a few which describe the point in principle. And out of these few I prefer the ones which let the subject open to physiological and physical aspects. To be exact and objective: Music is a phenomenon resulting from cultural engagement, whereby noise is employed to formulate "order in it self". The fact that music causes emotions and mediates messages, makes this subject interesting and important for the whole era of mankind. I think that "order in it self" is a keyword to come into a view that shows "music" like an imprint or a copy of the universe. On the other hand, we have the difficulty that musical creativity can only develop within the development of a cultural consent. Furthermore, a cultural consent in the matter of music needs to be based on a general principle of "order". A huge variety of organizing principles is imaginable in order to give noise an "order in it self". One organizing principle that has become famous during the more recent history of mankind is the interval scale, in which every octave is regularly subdivided into twelve steps. This scale has become famous by a cultural consent which was followed by an immense number of human beings, greater than ever in other times or on other occasions. Yet meanwhile, this interval scale does not meet anymore the requirements of modern musical creative power. Individual creations m u s t l e a v e the classical foundations to be attractive. But how than we come into a cultural consent which is suitable to give worth at the composers work? There is a technological basis to realize every "imaginable" sound and to apply to this sound any organizing principle. But it is not apparent, according to which foundations an order of sounds should be established when the conventional concepts are left behind. "Imaginable" is nothing but reproduction of already imprinted structures. We need the theory and, based on it, the instrument that gives opportunity to "reform" our musically imprints. Once again: "Bach-composing" in the sense of "new". If you find it worth to think about the announced matter, please let me know your comment and any other suggestion as well as criticism or contrary position. I would be glad about any occasion to answer. If further wanted, I am ready to present my study or give parts of it, corresponding to the main aspects as mediated through the keywords mentioned above: "Musically perception" (starting in the very early evolution), "Digital sound generation", "PC-software for composition". The transfer can be done by paper mail, direct e-mail, WINWORD 6.0-doc-file (transfer by UU... or XX...en-/decoding is possible) but most appreciated, by an open discussion via mailing list. (I ask you to tolerate the unpractised English, I'll do my very best - increasingly better). Thanks for attention! With kind regards Dominikus Forcht All addresses: Stresemannstrasse 36, D-71634 Ludwigsburg letters: Postfach 402, D-71604 Ludwigsburg e-mail: CompuServe 100142,2656 via Internet: 100142.2656@compuserve.com phone: +49 / 7141 / 920974 fax: +49 / 7141 / 903481 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 15:17:39 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Beller Subject: Re: exchange Try Thoroughbred Music's Web page http://www.tbred-music.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 13:53:39 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Cody Westheimer Subject: Hi All! Comments: To: SYNTH-L@AMERICAN.edu Hi all, I'm new to the list. My name is Cody Westheimer. I am a junior at San Marcos High School in Santa Barbara, California. I currently own a Mac Quadra 610. I have a Yamaha PSR-510 as my synth. I use Finale 3.5.1, Band in a Box, Practica Musica, and Studio Vision Pro 2.0. I'm hoping to build my own studio with used equipment by the end of the year. I primarily compose using my MIDI setup. I also play trombone and tuba (and piano). Nice to meet you all. I look forward to a good time on this list! Thanks, Cody -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cody Westheimer codella@west.net /I /------------- I / -|--|-----|-- I || 0 || || \I \ _|__||____||_______________________ \-------------|--------------------\\ ___||_______________________|) |)-------|--------------------// "Life is like a music note, once you're played, you're just another note on the page" ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Jun 1996 21:36:17 PST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Miles Teg Subject: OS2 Tracker?!? Hello all, I'm really into Modual making and was wondering if anyone knew of a Tracker that is made for OS2 or that works under it. The reason is, I'm a BBS SysOp and have only one computer...and neither ScreamTracker, XTracker, MultiTracker, or DigiTracker work under OS2!!! So any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks a lot. Miles Teg mentat@juno.com "Those who use free E-Mail services are surely wise." -me ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 06:20:59 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Andrew Whittle. AWhit." Subject: Re: Best Equipment In a message dated 07/06/96 22:02:41, Ron Hillman wrote: >Or a Arp Odyssey, and a Korg M1 The Korg M1 is a superb keyboard! The quality is brilliant with exceptional sound banks. It has much to offer for around $1000, possibly a lot cheaper if you can find a second hand one. Andy W. Andysmoke@aol.com --------------------------------- Computers aren't intelligent, they just think they are! ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 06:21:07 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Andrew Whittle. AWhit." Subject: MIDI files needed. I have been searching endless software libraries and doing so many searches looking for the MIDI files to any Indie groups, eg. Oasis, Lightning Seeds, Garbadge, Blur, etc. I have had no such luck. I can only think that it is no one likes Indie bands, or that their songs are so hard to play/input that no-one has bothered to try. Could anyone point me in the direction of a place where I can get MIDI files on any of these bands? Thanks in Advance Andy W. Andysmoke@aol.com ------------------------------------ Don't use a big word where a diminutive one will suffice. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 07:37:11 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Andrew Whittle. AWhit." Subject: Re: OS2 Tracker?!? In a message dated 09/06/96 01:57:32, you write: >neither ScreamTracker, >XTracker, MultiTracker, or DigiTracker work under OS2!!! So any help >would be greatly appreciated! Well there is one simple solution to that - GET WINDOWS! I don't work for Microsoft (honest)! Andy W. Andysmoke@aol.com -------------------------------- The beatings will continue until morale improves. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 07:52:33 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Pacific-Atlantic Mtg ******* Subject: IBM Music Feature??? (EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU) During the late 1980's Fred Hofstetter was promoting the IBM Music Feature and had begun to write a book on the BASICs of Computer Music. As I recall, this book explained the procedures of programming the IBM Music Feature using the BASIC computer language. Although I have searched extensively using Internet search engines, WhoIs, Library of Congress, etc., I have been unable to find reference to either Fred Hofstetter or the IBM Music Feature. This was as much as I was able to get in a search through http://galaxy.einet.net: Gopher Titles- for ``IBM and Music and Feature.'' 1 documents found. * IBM Music Feature Card- Score: 1000 gopher://isaac.engr.washington.edu/0R156893-158190-/arch/usenet/comp.o This section is from the document '/arch/usenet/comp.os.os2.multimedia/Comp.os. os2.multimedia.9308.2'. Server error: '/arch/usenet/comp.os.os2.multimedia/Comp.os.os2.multimedia.9308.2' does not exist!! error.host 1. Can anyone enlighten me? Does anyone know if there are any other IBM compatible sound cards programmable in BASIC? Thanks very much. -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Save paper; save a tree! Communicate electronically. 74020.1541@Compuserve.com Leave room on the Information Super Highway for older economy vehicles. Beware the GUI Iconographic Dependency Syndrome Conspiracy. $$ $$ http://www.pe.net/~batetew $$$$$$$$$$$ $$ $$ $$ $$ (Pacific & Atlantic Mortgage) $$$$$$$$$$$ $$ $$ $$ $$ http://www.hypercon.com/lebaron $$ $$ $$ $$ (Workable Workplace) $$ $$ $$ Fight Information Apartheid! $$ $$ Merrill $$ Curse Mice! $$ Tew -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 17:30:05 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Stefan Trischler Organization: Black*Board Edu Network Austria Subject: Re(2): OS2 Tracker?!? >>neither ScreamTracker, >>XTracker, MultiTracker, or DigiTracker work under OS2!!! So any help >>would be greatly appreciated! > >Well there is one simple solution to that - GET WINDOWS! I don't work for >Microsoft (honest)! I disagree with that..... As he wrote, he is a BBS Sysop, and has only one computer, so that one has to be run under a multitasking environment, but most trackers don't work properly under Win95... That's a problem:f. eg. I have tried to run FastTracker on several Win95 machines, it worked on 1 of 5 only...:(( --- OffRoad 1.9o unregistered -- Black*Board ........ Netz fuer Schule und Bildung ...... Edu Network Austria Salzburg ... Klagenfurt ... Graz .. Wien ... Linz ... Goetzis ... Innsbruck FirstClass/telnet .. bboard.blackbox.or.at 3000 .. Modem Wien: +43-1-4077288 Info-E-Mail ........ info@bboard.blackbox.or.at .. Hotline: +43-1-4077291 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 11:49:22 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Andrew Whittle. AWhit." Subject: Re(3): OS2 Tracker?!? Well, you could try using Windows 3.x Unless it's for Win95. There are several programs I have encountered that will not work under Win95, but theses are all DOS programmes. Good luck Andy W. Andysmoke@aol.com --------------------------------- Computers make very fast and very accurate mistakes! ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 14:08:05 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: DR STEPHEN WEINSTOCK Subject: Is this the right place . . . . -- [ From: Steve Weinstock * EMC.Ver #2.10P ] -- Having only briefly subscribed to the EMUSIC-D list for a few weeks about a year ago, I cautiously ask the following questions based upon what I've seen since resubscribing: (1) Is this a safe place to ask if anyone knows where I can get a Windows MME driver for a CMS-444-II MIDI interface (made by the now defunct Computer Nusic Supply)? (1a) If not, please don't yell at me! (1b) If yes, where can I get such a driver? (2) Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 08:53:01 -1100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Tim Robinson Subject: Re: Bach-composing ** Dominikus Forcht wrote: Once, the "construction" within the scale of twelve-part-octaves was "primary" and "musically feeling" to the constructions was developed by generations of listeners in the following centuries. We should try a similar new way if we want to break out of the twelve-part-octaves (I think we should want). ** Should we also break out of the twenty-six letter alphabet? Tim Robinson, (tim@liro.fri.cri.nz) _ NZ Logging Truck Logging Industry Research Organisation, / | =|====|= =|====|= PO Box 147, Rotorua, New Zealand |_| =|====|= =|====|= Ph. 0064-7-3487-168 Fax. 0064-7-3462-886 OO~~~~~~OO~---OO~~~~OO ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 9 Jun 1996 23:00:41 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: L F HAMMOND Subject: MiniMoog Oscillator board problem: help! Hi Please respond to me at lhammond@uvic.ca if you have a suggestion for the following puzzle. You probably need the tech manual for the mini to follow this. This one has me very puzzled. I have cleaned the keyboard, done little things, pulled the oscillator board and put it in another mini and the problem duplicates itself, therefore the problem, I am convinced, lies in the oscillator board. At first, Oscillator 1 only ran for the top octave of the keyboard, when range for oscillator 2 was set at 2', or two octaves when set at 4'. (Note, that is Oscillator 2's range). In any other setting of oscillator 2's range, oscillator 1 is silent. In addition, there was a ring mod/audio freq modulation/fuzz on the second last note on the keyboard above where Oscillator 1 would cut out if you play down the keyboard. Oscillator 3 runs in all respects, regardless of the above. Therefore power/keyboard/pitch wheel/mod wheel/ground/cv in/even octave switch circuitry should be okay, or it would be effected as well. All other boards and dials behave normally. I swapped boards with another mini, the problem duplicates itself, ergo problem in the oscillator board? As I see it power and cv are the same to all three oscillators, and that also dismisses other causes. I changed the lone (?) electrolytic (C10). I swapped IC2 and IC7 (a 3046, which is a ???), same problem, oscill. 3 continues to run. Therefore those ICs are good, as one runs Oscillator 3, and the other runs Oscill. 1 & 2. Next I pulled and socketed all the 741 op amps and replaced all with new ones. I made new resistor/cap sets for R70, R106, and R128. Result: Oscillator 1 plays the top octave keyboard if oscillator 2's range is 2', and runs the top two octaves if range= 4'. Any other setting or lower keys equals zero sound, except a minor bump (cap?, but so quiet it could be envelope on). Regardless of settings, Oscillator 2 is zero output. There is also a distortion on one key only, just above the cutoff key. Appears to be no improvement, BUT... Next step is interesting. I pull IC4, which feeds cv to oscillator two, and get a sustained high pitch from Oscillator 2. It does not respond to the various controllers, including master and local tune, mod, and pitch wheel. It shouldn't as those all enter Oscillator 2 through IC4. BUT, now oscillator 1 behaves normally, responding to everything and tracking with oscillator 3 (the no problem one). Responds to all keys and no distortion or thump. If I pull IC5 (after the 3046, feeds the transistor chain that makes the waveforms) on oscillator 2, I lose the sustained unchanging high pitch. The mini is now a two oscillator machine. Still phat, but missing an oscillator. I have gone over it with a magnifying glass. no visible burned resistors. i pulled both sockets for the 741s on oscillator 2 and resoldered them. I looked inside the scale and range pots. I looked for solder breaks. I am stumped, but suspect the answer is very close by. As I said, this is being done as a favour for someone and I am already past my expertise, but fat lot of chance in finding anyone else interested in spending days over antique electronics. So, suggestions? Please respond to the address below. Thanks gang! Lorne ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>>> I AM NOW AT: lhammond@uvic.ca <<<<<<<< ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 09:40:13 +0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Juan Manuel Rodriguez C." Subject: About Cakewalk Pro I got the old 3.0 version of Cakewalk Professional for windows, and I've a very big problem, when I select the Midi devices , I can choose: In: Sb16 midi in Out: Sb16 midi out Microsoft Midimapper Why the two output options can't be used at the same time>? And is it available another tool to be used as Midimapper , ( My keyboard is not GM) , I've problems with it , and the confused drums are driving me crazy!! Thanks a lOT: JuanManuel ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 17:33:02 PDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Fred MoTTe Subject: MIDI TIME PIECE II Hi all, I'm planning to get a Midi Time Piece II from MOTU, for PC with Windows. Does anyone here have any comment ( good or bad ) about it ? Is there any other one better, cheaper or whatever ? Thanks. Fred. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:44:14 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Ross O. Wagner" Subject: Questions about U2 -- Post_Achtung Baby_ Greetings and salutations, I'm in need of more than a little advice and opinion -- so's how about helpin' me out? My concern is U2 -- more specifically, I'm interested in what the die-hard fans think about the new direction the group has been taking since about 1991 (post _Achtung Baby_). What have you noticed? Are you pleased or pissed? Be as detailed, personal, analytical, and truthful as possible. This then is your assignment (hey, I'm askin' pretty please -- with all the fixin's) -- put on your thinking cap or just let yourself vent, but tell me what you think of your band (that's U2 for those who aren't paying attention) since 1991? Give me all you got -- there might be a paper in this somewhere and accolades and kudos for you aplenty. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 08:40:17 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Ron Hillman Organization: Hollywood International Talents Subject: Re: MIDI TIME PIECE II Fred MoTTe wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm planning to get a Midi Time Piece II from MOTU, for PC with > Windows. Does anyone here have any comment ( good or bad ) about it ? > Is there any other one better, cheaper or whatever ? > > Thanks. > > Fred. Fred: I don't know about cheaper or better, but I will never buy a MPTU product again especially a interface. I have a midi express and it has been a constant source of irritation. The support is lousy, They actually told me "I dunno". So watch out! Ron ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:34:20 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: L F HAMMOND Subject: WIN 95 problem: cakewalk 3.0/mpu &sound card Win 95 does not seem to recognize the Cakewlk driver. It sends to the MPU if I reset to that, rather than the soundcard, but, it does not accept the MIDI in from the MPU. It gives lots of old pre-WIN95 messages about the MIDI mapper that the system no longer uses. The Cakewalk site says zip about WIN95 drivers. In Cakewalk I cannot select and move to the top of the list the MPU-IN source. Anyone? Lorne ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>>> I AM NOW AT: lhammond@uvic.ca <<<<<<<< ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 14:43:49 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Dominikus Forcht <100142.2656@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Bach-composing >> Because of the formulation "...break out of the twelve-part-octaves..." ** Tim Robinson wrote: > Should we also break out of the twenty-six letter alphabet? This, we should not. Not yet. As long as we are able to formulate enough information to stay in social contact and to exchange information, I think the well-known alphabet is hardly to substitute. However, if I look - for instance - at technical information, some times I get the feeling that a kind of substitution of the alphabet has already started. Or if I look at papers for education... Well, the motivation to it has other reasons than a "break out of twelve-part-octaves" and the phenomena are of kind of visual symbolic. Just the one is similar: Wherever we have more "to say" than from the conventional basis is granted, we always searching for individual expressions, right?. The more these are in the range of a general (or common) consent the more our expressions are comprehensible. There is one of the setup points in the matter of my study. The basic idea is (assuming one want to break out...) to win basics for later common consents by attention to the harmonic series. Would not this be the most easy way: "Break out" of conventional rules and fall into the universal biological basis of perception that presents the new rules. What I did is nothing but developing the usability of the harmonic series for composing tunes and sounds. This causes many great possibilities to the musical future (including adaptations of technology). "To break out..." is just a consequence from using of harmonics for composition. Hoping I understood you right and my answer makes you interested for the project. Thanks and regards! Dominikus ============================================== (...asking for tolerance about the uneducated English) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 19:36:00 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Best Equipment >The Korg M1 is a superb keyboard! But not much of a synthesiser. Did the original poster actually say what he was wanting to use the keyboard for, education-wise? Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 13:02:32 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Dave Rosborough Subject: Re: MIDI TIME PIECE II >Fred: I don't know about cheaper or better, but I will never buy a MPTU >product again especially a interface. I have a midi express and it has >been a constant source of irritation. The support is lousy, They actually >told me "I dunno". So watch out! >Ron Hmm... I don't like to hear that, because I'm just about to buy a FastLane interface (I know, it's not very big, but it's all I need for now)... Has anyone used one of these before? My main reason for choosing it is that it's got a MIDI-THRU switch so that I don't have to have my computer on to make my X3 talk to my MicroPiano... Anyone have horror stories? Thanx... TTYl DaveR _____________________________________________________________ David Rosborough Web Author, Database Designer @ Faculty of Education, SFU Apple Education Consultant @ SFU drosboro@sfu.ca http://www.educ.sfu.ca/people/DavidR/ _____________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 11:58:26 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Ron Hillman Organization: Hollywood International Talents Subject: Re: Best Equipment What synthesizer is there out there that has the capability to teach students to learn the different waveforms and how they sound, how to manipulate a filter and a envelope generator? These students should be able to make sounds from scratch and play them easily. Ron ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 14:09:16 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: EMUSIC-L vs. SYNTH-L Time for me to put on my Mean Ole Moderator's hat before getting into the fun discussions once more: I will admit to having been guilty of slipping over the EMUSIC/SYNTH divide myself recently, in my piece on the Alesis QS6 answering Bacil's query. However, just because the moderator was briefly out of line does not mean that the policy has been dropped. We have two newsgroups for a reason. A lot of EMUSIC-L readers are aggravated and bored by talk of sound cards, librarian programs, new vs. old keyboards, and which computer platform is best for running multithreaded TA/DMN loops in a multitasking environment without incurring ND:T errors. A lot of SYNTH-L readers are lost and bored with chatter on the origins of musique concrete, microtonality, the future of object-oriented sound synthesis codes, and whether Harry Partch would be better accepted today for his new approaches to music creation than when he was teaching. We have two newsgroups for a reason. Since SYNTH-L is more freewheeling, we rarely get people posting EMUSIC-L stuff there and being yelled at for it, but the reverse is not true. Please subscribe to SYNTH-L and take your gearhead stuff there. You'll get a more sympathetic audience, I promise. mike -- I guess you have to get your page turner to press the latch button. (robinsot) ========================================================================== Mike Metlay - ATOMIC CITY - P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com -- http://pd.net/atomic-city -- 800.924.ATOM = CD orders via LOFTY PURSUITS: 800.548.6724 & 904.385.6463, FAX 904.668.5825 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 14:13:31 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nathanael W Berry Subject: Re: Bach-composing > Once, the "construction" within the scale of >twelve-part-octaves was "primary" and "musically feeling" to the constructions >was developed by generations of listeners in the following centuries. We should >try a similar new way if we want to break out of the twelve-part-octaves (I >think we should want). The 12 tone octave applies generally to western music, however, keyboards and sound cards are generally strapped to the tempered interpretation. Orchestral instruments (and entire orchestra's for that matter), while generally playing on 12 note scales, perform "micro tuning" on a regular basis to create the natural tuning (for that specific key) or whatever specific tone the director is looking for. Some synths are capable of playing a wide variety of tunings - our twelve note keyboards tend to make playing some of them a bit funky. There is a program somewhere that can create all kinds of tunings and scales on properly equiped PC soundcards. I think I saw it reviewed either on the net, Keyboard mag, or Electronic Musician mag - cant remember which (big help huh :). I'm pretty sure it was within the last year. > >It is well-known that each audible work exists "musically" only in cultural >consents of the society. My daughter is adopted, and prior to about 10 months of age she was not exposed to music of any type that we know of. However, when we finally got her home, she responded to particular types of music. She was just learning to walk, and if the "music" had a snappy beat and fairly sharp (as in fast attack and bright) tune (including salsa, pop-rock, etc), she would wiggle her little butt and stamp her feat! She was definitly not into lilting music of any kind. Pink Floyd and Eric Clapton were generally out, most orchestral pieces are out as well, although a Sousa type march got some recognition. Most childrens music doesn't cut it with her. It is unlikely that she was picking up queues from the rest of the family, since we all tend to gravitate to other types of music (though you're likely to hear just about anything). > But so far as a consent resulting from the interval >scale of twelve-part-octaves, we have an opportunity to improve our musicality >with opening understanding of cultural consents. "Improve" is certainly subject to an individual's perception, as is "musicality". There is certainly a degree of cultural conditioning that tailors our likes and dislikes, but people that have grown up together, exposed to the same types (if not the same music) have different opinions about the same music. I think a broad exposure to music can only enhance ones appreciation of music - at worst on can find out what one doesn't like. >When an individual makes sounds and other noise by oneself and without a special >aim or when he produces such sounds and noise by means of tools, this is usually >done for test and reflection purposes. ??? Lost me on that one. When I hit a hammer with a nail, I puposefully make a sound with a tool. When I miss the nail and hit my thumb, I make a completely different sound - though still for a purpose or "aim". Are you refering to sounds I "make" when I accidentally step on the cat (honest, it was an accident :), or trip and fall down the stairs? I am clearly not creating these sounds for test and reflection purposes, and they have no apparent special aim [barring explacatives]. > But what then is "music"? ... To be exact and objective: > >Music is a phenomenon resulting from cultural engagement, whereby noise is >employed to formulate "order in it self". The fact that music causes emotions >and mediates messages, makes this subject interesting and important for the >whole era of mankind. > I think this is a very limiting definition. Maybe I confuse "music" with "musical". >... Individual creations m u s t l e a v e the classical foundations to >be attractive. Not sure I agree with that one, "must leave"? > But how than we come into a cultural consent which is suitable to >give worth at the composers work? I do not think the individual's right to create whatever music he/she desires is in any danger. To get paid for the creations is a different matter. If the music actually infringes on others, the musician may even be asked to stop (hopefully with a bit of politeness). >"Imaginable" is nothing but reproduction of already imprinted structures. You seem to give "structures" a short shift here. Our imaginations are capable of taking a brain stored blip and combining it with other blips to create a new blip, etc (hence creativity). what you seem (?) to be targeting more is our method of relaying the information in our imaginations. That we must do in terms somewhat familiar to the receiver, or the message will be meaningless. If I told someone along the banks of the nile in 2465 BC that I had seen a craft that looked remarkably like NASA's space shuttle - the someone would be clueless (and not only because they couldn't speak english). If I explained that I saw a flaming chariot ascend into the heavens, I might get a bit more credibility (although my english would still be a problem). Even though the receiver of the information had not seen the flaming chariot, that someone could imagine what I was talking about. Further still, if I told 10 people, and then asked them to draw what they imagined, I would get 10 different pictures - though all would have something in common. After seeing each other's drawings, they might have a slightly different version of their imaginations if they drew the picture again. To sum up this garrulous post. I guess I'm not sure what you are getting at. Are you proposing we create a different scale (maybe based on one or more of the many found around the world, the original post had something about a thousand note scale...arbitrary?) as the universal scale - then deviate from that scale to suit our individual whims? Deviating from the existing scales (if one so desires) seems fairly painless, so what is the point of creating another? Anytime we create something "universal" it often becomes something we all learn to dislike - we doom ourselves to "populist" constraints. Many (dare I say most) musicians are not associated with computers, so if a computer is required, the univeral nature of the scale is severely limited. If such a scale is created, will it be capable of encapsulating all of the music currently and past produced, and be true to the original scale's purpose? What about documenting the nuances of performance that are not inherent in a scale - how will they be applied? Universal peace would be nice - but there are those who would hate that too! Nate ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 13:39:17 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Craig Marks Subject: DrumTrax Comments: cc: "Electronic music \"gearhead\" list" Hi y'all, Does anyone have any experience with DrumTrax products. They sell MIDI drum patterns. I am considering purchasing one of their libraries, but haven't been able to find any demos. Does anyone have any reviews of the product? Thanks. -Craig ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 14:57:18 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: MIDI TIME PIECE II In-Reply-To: from "Dave Rosborough" at Jun 10, 96 01:02:32 pm Dave Rosborough writes-- > >>Fred: I don't know about cheaper or better, but I will never buy a MPTU >>product again especially a interface. I have a midi express and it has >>been a constant source of irritation. The support is lousy, They actually >>told me "I dunno". So watch out! >>Ron > >Hmm... I don't like to hear that, because I'm just about to buy a FastLane >interface (I know, it's not very big, but it's all I need for now)... Has >anyone used one of these before? My main reason for choosing it is that >it's got a MIDI-THRU switch so that I don't have to have my computer on to >make my X3 talk to my MicroPiano... Anyone have horror stories? Take this to SYNTH-L. mike -- I guess you have to get your page turner to press the latch button. (robinsot) ========================================================================== Mike Metlay - ATOMIC CITY - P. O. Box 81175, Pittsburgh, PA 15217-0675 USA = atomic@netcom.com -- http://pd.net/atomic-city -- 800.924.ATOM = CD orders via LOFTY PURSUITS: 800.548.6724 & 904.385.6463, FAX 904.668.5825 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 00:54:31 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Leonine Subject: Re: MIDI TIME PIECE II In-Reply-To: On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, Dave Rosborough wrote: > >Fred: I don't know about cheaper or better, but I will never buy a MPTU > >product again especially a interface. I have a midi express and it has > >been a constant source of irritation. The support is lousy, They actually > >told me "I dunno". So watch out! > >Ron > > Hmm... I don't like to hear that, because I'm just about to buy a FastLane > interface (I know, it's not very big, but it's all I need for now)... Has > anyone used one of these before? My main reason for choosing it is that > it's got a MIDI-THRU switch so that I don't have to have my computer on to > make my X3 talk to my MicroPiano... Anyone have horror stories? > > Thanx... > Here's just my two cents' worth: I've had a MTP II since 1992-93 (right around new year's sometime), and I've had no problems with it; it's worked like a charm and I've used it for studio work, band rehearsals, touring, and even with wireless MIDI units. It's been completely max'ed out with gear, complete with SysEx, sample & patch dumps, and controller messages all at once, performing flawlessly. One other thing I like is it's softare updates are available on the internet, and they seem to do a pretty good job of not releasing half-baked stuff that's not quite ready. Overall, it's served me much better than my Opcode Studio 5 did. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 08:43:38 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mary Jane MacHaffie Subject: Re: IBM Music Feature??? Comments: cc: Mary Jane MacHaffie In-Reply-To: from "Pacific-Atlantic Mtg *******" at Jun 9, 96 07:52:33 am > > (EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU) During the late 1980's Fred Hofstetter was > promoting the IBM Music Feature and had begun to write a book on the > BASICs of Computer Music. As I recall, this book explained the > procedures of programming the IBM Music Feature using the BASIC > computer language. > > Although I have searched extensively using Internet search engines, > WhoIs, Library of Congress, etc., I have been unable to find > reference to either Fred Hofstetter or the IBM Music Feature. This > was as much as I was able to get in a search through > http://galaxy.einet.net: > > Gopher Titles- for ``IBM and Music and Feature.'' 1 documents > found. > > * IBM Music Feature Card- Score: 1000 > > gopher://isaac.engr.washington.edu/0R156893-158190-/arch/usenet/comp.o > > This section is from the document > '/arch/usenet/comp.os.os2.multimedia/Comp.os. > os2.multimedia.9308.2'. > > Server error: > '/arch/usenet/comp.os.os2.multimedia/Comp.os.os2.multimedia.9308.2' > does not exist!! error.host 1. > > Can anyone enlighten me? > > Does anyone know if there are any other IBM compatible sound cards > programmable in BASIC? > > Thanks very much. > > -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > Save paper; save a tree! Communicate electronically. > 74020.1541@Compuserve.com > Leave room on the Information Super Highway for older economy vehicles. > Beware the GUI Iconographic Dependency Syndrome Conspiracy. > $$ $$ http://www.pe.net/~batetew $$$$$$$$$$$ > $$ $$ $$ $$ (Pacific & Atlantic Mortgage) $$$$$$$$$$$ > $$ $$ $$ $$ http://www.hypercon.com/lebaron $$ > $$ $$ $$ (Workable Workplace) $$ > $$ $$ Fight Information Apartheid! $$ > $$ Merrill $$ Curse Mice! $$ Tew > -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ This may help Fred T. Hofstetter wrote COMPUTER LITERACY FOR MUSICIANS Pub. Prentice Hall, Inc. in 1988 ISBN # 0-13-164477-7 Our school uses the IBM sound card for an ear training program called GUIDO, that Hofstetter wrote. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:05:12 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nils Pietschmann Subject: MIRT Project Published Dear musicians & music enthusiasts, some of you have helped us last year by responding to our Musical Instrument Design Questionnaire. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you all for your help. I have now the pleasure to announce the publication of one of our project reports. Andrew Purdy's report will be also be published soon. Name of author: Nils Pietschmann Title: New Design Proposals for Modern Musical Instruments Publisher: Tectum Verlag Edition Wissenschaft Reihe Musikwissenschaft, Band 3 ISBN: 3-89608-283-3 Here is the abstact of the project report. The MIRT projects investigate timbral manipulation on networked musical instruments (i.e. via MIDI). By using synthesis and sound processing parameters, the proposed software system digIT (digital Intera ctive Technology) seeks to offer highly interactive real-time manipulation on synthesisers and studio equipment. This way of working introduces The Try Out Watch & Listen Principle as an optimised ha nd operated interfacing method, enabling the user to create complex mixtures of synthesis and processing techniques (Dynamic Real Time Performance Synthesis). In other words, digIT transforms manual user input into a stream of data which is sent to a user defined set-up of music technology. Through immediate aural feedback from the connected hardware in combination with some form of graphical re presentation, digIT is able to provide an interactive multimedia link between the user and his/her instruments. The digIT philosophy is therefore a modern approach to explore the capability of networ ked music technology. As well as focusing on the need to improve hand operated user interfaces for musical applications, this paper also discusses new interfacing standards for music technology. The digIT software prototypes PerformaX and StudiomaX are fully operational on the Atari ST range of computers. A new, advanced prototype called MIRTmaX is running on the Apple Macintosh. The complete report can be ordered worldwide from: Tectum Verlag Edition Wissenschaft Am Roedchen 18 35043 Marburg Tel: +49 (0)6421 - 481 523 Fax: +49 (0)6421 - 43 470 If you are interested in any of the software prototypes, please contact us personally. Nils Pietschmann Andrew Purdy Pruefeninger Str. 56 b Lohmuehlenstr. 27 D-93049 Regensburg D-12435 Berlin Tel. +49 (0)941 - 25 061 Tel. +49 (0)30 - 534 8763 Fax +49 (0)941 - 270 666 e-mail: pin10231@ e-mail: eibi@ 1.stud.ngate.uni-regensburg.de chemie.fu-berlin.de Thank you once more for your interest in our work. Nils Pietschmann & Andrew Purdy (MIRT) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 11:17:41 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Timothy Kelly Subject: Re: Best Equipment, Filters, Waveforms. You wrote: > >What synthesizer is there out there that has the capability to teach students to learn >the different waveforms and how they sound, how to manipulate a filter and a envelope >generator? These students should be able to make sounds from scratch and play them >easily. > >Ron > Hi All, Emu Morpheus Z Plane Synth is what I would use if I was teaching a class on programing synths. The waveforms are good, and the 200 filters, plus the envelope within an envelope options, make the Morpheus easily the most programmable rack mount sound module ever made. The 200 real time filters can be morphed and chained. You can have 10 note on controller assignemnts and 10 real time controller assignments all going on at once. The 63 function generator or the envelope within an envelope shapes let you do all kinds of fun sound stuff. The Morpheus is easily the most expressive sound module yet. And the cpu is fast enough that you can really create fat layered sounds, you can stack up to 16 2 voice sounds or use all the synths voices for just one patch. The manual has excellent programming tutorials that assume you have never owned a synth before. Each filter is explained telling you what it does and suggestions for how to use it on many also. The Morpheus is a very easy synth for a beginner to program, and it allows you to get into creating and programing sounds as deep as you want, one step at a time. And its a fun synth to play and use. Easily hands down the most popular sound module for anyone doing programming, whether a beginneer or a world class programmer. If you havent had a chance to try The Morpheus out, ignore the demo tunes, just get a soda or a cup of coffee and skim through the owners manual. There are a lot of sound and music things you can do with the Moprheus faster and easier than on any synth ever made, also a lot of sound things that are impossible for other synths to do. Happy Sounds from the Z Plane. 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: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 15:01:56 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Andrew Whittle. AWhit." Subject: Thanks to everyone who replied! I just want to say thanks to everyone who replied to my 'HELP' message a while a go. A BIG thanks to Stefan, who was the only person who did reply!!! If anyone has any MIDI's of good bands, please mail me. Thanks, Andy W. Andysmoke@aol.com ----------------------------------------- Did you ever stop to think, and forget to start again? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 18:31:05 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nathanael W Berry Subject: Re: Best Equipment >What synthesizer is there out there that has the capability to teach students to learn >the different waveforms and how they sound, how to manipulate a filter and a envelope >generator? These students should be able to make sounds from scratch and play them >easily. > If you really want to see/hear the sounds, get an inexpensive but programmable keyboard synth and put a few hundred dollars into an inexpensive oscilloscope, or PC based capture board (soundcard capable of recording would work) if you have a PC readily available (might help you because you can print screen captures of the basic waveforms). Also check used market for Roland MT32 and Yamaha FB01 (to name a few inexpensive modules)for additional techniques/waveforms. The keyboard is really optional if you have a computer - but people sometimes find easier to learn if they can connect the new material with something familiar. If you get a wavetable synth, make sure it has the basic waveforms you need. An old (ensoniq) ESQ-1 could probably be had for around $400. It has 3 oscillators per voice, and can be layered (to 6 osc/voice) I believe. Waveforms are simple additive synthesis with a few sync options, LFOs, etc. I think additive synthesis (or subtractive) is a good place to start - FM is a little more complicated to visualize (IMO). On the computer side, a wave editing program and sound card can produce the same results. You can generate basic waveforms, then combine them to see what sound you get - play them back through a soundcard. Good Luck Nate ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 14:12:07 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "william.b.fox" Subject: Re: Best Equipment Ron Hillman asked: > What synthesizer is there out there that has the capability to teach > students to learn the different waveforms and how they sound, how to > manipulate a filter and a envelope generator? These students should > be able to make sounds from scratch and play them easily. The responses that I've seen so far were (1) a little too gear-heady and (2) not what I would recommend for entry level. So let me take a whack at an answer... Find some old bench test equipment from an electronics lab; oscillators, filters, resistor boxes, capacitor boxes, frequency counters, voltmeters, and oscilloscopes. Buy some resistors, capacitors, batteries, op amps (even lousy old 741s will do), jacks, shielded wire, solder, plugs, wire wick or a solder sucker,... If you can find any old monosynth, modular or one with jacks for access to various functions, then beg or borrow it. Prewire things if your kids are too young to handle a solder iron, but make it so they have to do the final interconnects. Let them measure 1V then 2V then 3V at a control input and listen to the results. Let them view waveforms on the oscilloscope while listening over speakers. Have a real fun lab! Then "graduate" the kids to a simple synth. (Roland Juno-106, Moog Micromoog or whatever.) Something that has all of its controls on the front panel (or separate programming box) and a simple architecture. Now the kids can "graduate" to more contemporary and complicated synths and samplers. I think that kids will be ready for sequencers and editor/librarians before you know it! I think that the kids will learn more completely this way and might even have more fun in the process. Good luck. Bill Fox ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:25:48 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Dominikus Forcht <100142.2656@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Bach-composing From Nathanael W. Berry I grateful receive his considerations and I take the occasion to answer... >>...try a similar new way if we want to break out of the twelve-part-octaves >>(I think we should want). >Some synths are capable of playing a wide variety of tunings - our >twelve note keyboards tend to make playing some of them a bit funky. >There is a program somewhere that can create all kinds of tunings >and scales on properly equipped PC soundcards. Pleased I notice that the technical development is this much helpful to create music. I have had also well impressions from the special section at the Frankfurt Music Fair last March. However, I have to mention one deficit: The technical development is still assuming that the scale of twelve-part-octaves (liberal, variable or strapped at the tempered tuning) is the greatest statute of our musical culture. (In this point of time, maybe most of musicians still tolerate this more than I do) >>...audible work exists "musically" only in cultural >>consents of the society. >...prior to about 10 months of age she was >not exposed to music of any type that we know of. However, when we finally >got her home, she responded to particular types of music. This is the same as I noticed on many comparable occasions. Probably it is a result of principles of general structures of the important auditorial parts in the brain. I remember reports from the brain research on how humans are responding at music: To respond to music is one of the mostly preserved faculties and one of the last which is lost. This as well as your notices are important hints why we make great demands on music we will "like" to hear. This kind of musicality is the general one and points to the biological foundations where perception of relations of physical phenomena is the entrance to the evolution of intelligence at all. >>...we have an opportunity to improve our musicality >>with opening understanding of cultural consents. >...can only enhance ones appreciation of >music - at worst on can find out what one doesn't like. ...a precise description, matching at my opinion. However, this concerns the human as a listener. Concerning the composer or musician, understanding of cultural consents on the fundamentals is a way to overstep currently kinds of art more successful. >>When an individual makes sounds and other noise by oneself and without a special >>aim or when he produces such sounds and noise by means of tools, this is usually >>done for test and reflection purposes. > ??? Lost me on that one. When I hit a hammer with a nail, I >purposefully make a sound with a tool. When I miss the nail and hit my thumb, I make a >completely different sound - though still for a purpose or "aim". Are you referring to sounds I >"make" when I accidentally step on the cat (honest, it was an accident :), or trip and fall down >the stairs? I am clearly not creating these sounds for test and reflection purposes, and they >have no apparent special aim [barring explacatives]. :) You are right and I have to revise this (inadvertent amusing) statement. Just let me stay one moment in this allegory: If you hit your thumb and, if this does not hurt and, if the sound was nice, I assume it could be that you repeat and try variations.... >>...Music is a phenomenon resulting from cultural engagement, whereby noise is >>employed to formulate "order in it self". >I think this is a very limiting definition. Maybe I confuse "music" >with "musical". It seems limiting, right. Some times there is a sporty drive to search for an "a priori". If you would be ready to accept this, I am sure you could find to a similar reduced formulation. >>... Individual creations m u s t l e a v e the classical foundations to >>be attractive. > Not sure I agree with that one, "must leave"? Maybe you can accept this if you think on how an active musician try to create own or other music "individually". To do so, is more and more limited in the range of classical foundations. Well, "must leave" I better should amend like "must search for differentiations more and more outside of classical foundations". >> But how than we come into a cultural consent which is suitable to >>give worth at the composers work? > I do not think the individual's right to create whatever music >he/she desires is in any danger. No objection. Just, I have the imagination that for a composer hundred years ago, it was without questions what notes and for what instruments he should write down his imagined tunes and sounds. The foundations giving him orientation. What orientation we will have in 2096? Therein is a crucial point of question: Shall we suggest anything at all in this matter? For general, I would say "no". However, if one find an universal way for new consents in basics, developing suggestions seems as a desirable intention. >>"Imaginable" is nothing but reproduction of already imprinted structures. >the universal nature of the scale is severely limited. >If such a scale is created, will it be capable of encapsulating all of the >music currently and past produced, and be true to the original scale's >purpose? What about documenting the nuances of performance that are >not inherent in a scale - how will they be applied? Here we come into sight of the target: A musical instrument be and was always - for most of musicians - a "composing machine". Regarding the keyboard-based musical instruments, since more than 500 years the tuning of the twelve tones per octave was not without problems. For example: At times where Bach was active, we know that the Mr. Marpurg and Kirnberger was in competing for "best tunings", whereby Kirnberger was a pupil of Bach. Bach himself - we know about the history - was very ambitious demanding in tunings on his instruments. We know also about some dissertations at this theme - unless the book from Martin Vogel "Anleitung zur harmonischen Analyse und zur reinen Intonation" (Bonn 1984). When I was growing as musician, chiefly creating jazz, I was in contact with some composers of the avantgarde in the range of time 1965 (+/- 10 years). In the early 60's I build my own electronic equipment and compose some of pure electronic sound paintings. Frustrated about all the creations (including my own) I developed the theory for musically using of the general harmonic series. The consequence was that I fall into the absolutly impossibility to create any example or instance for a long time. Just now, since general available computers are suitable and capable to serve on this matter, I developed the way to bring the "theory" into use. The result will be a very new kind of musical instrument ("composing machine" (see above)) if someone would be ready to realize the system-prototype. I just offer the system-draft, free for everyone. Regarding "scale": It is a point within my theory that each octave presents the harmonics as much as you want. The musical orientation within an endless range of possibilities was the problem I resolved by evaluation of interval-relations at 2^n. And the technological draft: The composer just works with predefined arithmetic rules by "click and draw " for spatial and temporal combinations of frequencies (to build any sound on any millisecond). So much for this moment. I would enjoy to answer for more of any questions. I'm thankful to Nathanael W. Berry that he was giving the occasion to talk about the project. Thanks Nate! Greetings! Dominikus ======================================================= (...asking for tolerance about the uneducated English) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 12:03:29 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Tom Jordan Subject: Re: Best Equipment Ron Hillman asked: > > What synthesizer is there out there that has the capability to teach > > students to learn the different waveforms and how they sound, how to > > manipulate a filter and a envelope generator? These students should > > be able to make sounds from scratch and play them easily. > Bill Fox had a great suggestion, but I must say I have been hesitant to respond. I'm supposed to be knowledgeable about all sorts of things to do in EM education, and I don't have a good answer. My old ARP 2600 is still the classic machine for this. I tend to go for the creativity in the music process nowadays, and less toward the nuts and bolts. I want to see the kids composing with a sequencer: doing linear assemblage, looping, and live improvisation. And I want to see them dealing with the necessary structures of melody and harmony from a grass roots approach, But, I will say that a couple of Macintosh shareware programs are really cool for exploring wave structure and sound processing. Digital Oscilloscope 2.0 is an oscilloscope on your Mac. And, Sound Sculptor 1.1.1 is a $10 sampler with oodles of processing possibilities. Being able to take your _own voice_ and hear it processed is extremely informative without the need for much use of language. I have also taught sequencing to kids on Ensoniq SD-1's, but we didn't really deal with the synthesis. I did not want to get them bogged down in sound building to the detriment of music making. 20 years ago it was easy fill your need with ElectroComps and 2600's. -- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tom Jordan Composer/Performer / Electronic Music Resource > Wired for Sound! - computer music for kids and > The Virtual Game Room - Uncommon Technological Events tjordan@iac.net ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 15:36:39 EDT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "william.b.fox" Subject: Look, Ma, No Keyboard! On the subject of "Samplers Nein Danke" on SYNTH-L, I said to Nick: >I'm sure that if you had a K2500, >for example, you'd somehow find a way to discover its deepest, darkest >quirks and faults in the synth programming portion... and USE them to >make interesting patches! And Nick said: > You're right. But how much finished music would result? Some, while I was > exploring and playing; then it would probably dry up in the absence of > timing/committing constraints. After checking out the gear-head portions of your web site, I'm wondering how you make any music at all with your live rig and no keyboard. "Nothing but net" er, I mean sliders and MAX? I have a few alternate controllers, but I'm still playing "notes" on a guitar, sax, pad, or voice. How do you program notes as the results of a slider move? Or are you running a sequencer and using sliders to change patch parameters and volume balancing? Or, as I suspect, have I totally missed the target? Bill Fox wbf@aloft.att.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 19:41:37 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Timothy Kelly Subject: Re: Look, Ma, No Keyboard! Hi All, I have no midi problems not being a keyboard player. Actually as far as midi goes, I think one has a performance and composing advantage not using a keyboard. The only midi patches that really sound best played on a midi keyboard are keyboard patches. My controllers are Human Voice, Guitar, Mouse and Jam Software. I use my keyboard as a sound module for my voice and guitar and for when keyboard playing friends drop by. If midi keyboards were no longer made, it wouldnt bother me at all. Happy Look Ma, No Keyboard 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: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 22:03:23 +0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Juan Manuel Rodriguez C." Subject: MPU-401 Comments: To: synth-l@american.edu Hi pals Sound Blaster's guide says it has support for the musical instrument MPU-401 interface, but when you run windows, any program on windows ask only for the Midimapper, I'd like to know if MPU-401 existed before the Midi agreement, and if it was ever exclusive of Roland Keyboards... Actually which musical devices requires or implies the use of this interface, is Yamaha compatible with that......? Also as I've heard on the list the roland RAP-10 soundcard functions as a synthesizer, i.d. it has sysex commands to change the cut-off frequency, i mean the soundcard has a real physic device to synth sound, or they're just emulated by software, and on the other hand how big are they ROM samples, are they modifiable, and changes stored on ram (hdisk),bye, thanks Greets, a non-roland but possible future roland owner. (pd: the rap 10 has a SCSI compatible CD-rom interface????)