========================================================================= Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:02:27 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: MJ Subject: Re: The Techno Discussion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Yvan, Sorry... a little good ol' US hip-hop culture slang. Yooz= You (making things plural is popular) a= self explanatory Deeeep= Deep... well-versed, intelligent, intellectual, etc Bruva= Brother. Fellow male human being. G= Popular thing to call someone you like or approve of. MJ ---------- > From: Yvan Vander Sanden > To: EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU > Subject: Re: The Techno Discussion > Date: Thursday, January 30, 1997 4:31 PM > > At 21:48 29/01/97 -0500, you wrote: > >Dang, yooz a deeeep bruva, G!!! > > > This could be interesting, but I do not know whtat you mean... > Can you explain yourself to foreign English speakers? > greetings, > > Yvan Vander Sanden > Technology in Music Education: > Post-graduate student at the Lemmens Institute, Leuven > Oude markt 31 > B-3000 Leuven > Belgium > Tel. 0032/16/232819 > E-mail: yvan.be@glo.be > > I also maintain a web-site for the association for Flemish Music Educators. > Please visit at: http://titan.glo.be/~gd31185/mvo/frames/ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 10:41:24 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Verraes Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SINBYTE@AOL.COM wrote: > NOTHING IS ART. EVERYTHING IS A RESPONSE TO A STIMULI. A CHEMICAL, > ELECTRICAL RESPONSE TO A STIMULI. YOU DECIDE THE ORIGIN OF THE ARTISTIC > CREATIVITY(the stimuli) AND THEN YOU REACT IN THE APPROPRIATE > MEDIUM(response). I AM NOT AN EXPERT, NOR INTELLECT, NOR PHILOSIPHER, NOT > MUSICIAN, OR PAINTER, OR PHOTOGRAPHER, I AM ME. I HAVE DECIDED THAT: What you are saying here is that, because thinking is a chemical and electrical process, art does not exist. > > ART > IS > A > RESPONSE > > OPEN EARS, > SINBYTE If art was _only_ a response to these stimuli, we wouldn't have a discussion at all. Sometimes I actually wish the definition was that simple. But the society changes, ergo art changes, ergo the definition of art changes. _____________________ Mathias Verraes eat.my.shorts@glo.be _____________________ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 10:33:52 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Techno=Money and other wonders of the world. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Au contraire. Nothing like a PhD to straighten up a surly waiter. ;) That's the only thing I use mine for. (Well, and hotel staff and bank tellers.) Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 10:34:14 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: technocomment Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Most of the techno and house artists I know amaze me for just the opposite: >They are able to get sounds out of such a minimal setup that I never thought >existed. The techno artists who get the major coverage in the music equipment magazines seem to be the ones with the huge piles of gear and with lots of good things to say about their instruments. I wonder why? Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 10:33:57 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: everything old is new again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >It's been 'time to get to work' for over a decade, and the people who >do so generally find their work ignored in favor of the new'n'weirdish. Then again, I seem to get totally ignored because I seem to be too new'n'weirdish. If I was just recording CD's and tapes and behaving myself, I'd probably be OK, but because I want to experiment with control systems, imagery and notions of process, I'm essentially told to fuck off. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 09:24:32 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Christian Kobusch User Subject: Re: Chord progressions--Is Techno a benefit to culture? You're right ! Many people think it's so easy to compose on a synth or a comp but they never tried... I think it's more difficult to compose on a sampling workstation or so than to compose with a 4-headed rock band, cause you got almost endless opportunities , sounds etc. Makin really good electronic music is really difficult. see ya , Christian from Germany ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 10:15:55 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: SINBYTE@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) In a message dated 97-02-01 04:51:53 EST, you write: << If art was _only_ a response to these stimuli, we wouldn't have a discussion at all. Sometimes I actually wish the definition was that simple. But the society changes, ergo art changes, ergo the definition of art changes. >> To me, it seems the point of discussion, would be to understand the stimuli. For then, we would be able to understand the response. For example: HARD TIMES ~~~> HARD LIFE ~~~> ANGRY YOUTH~~> ANGRY MUSIC(art?) bad example, but it's easiest to express. ??????? That's my take on the situation.... sin ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 10:24:55 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: SINBYTE@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) In a message dated 97-01-31 21:59:32 EST, you write: << Oh. You decided? Sounds fascist. >> It's my world.... I can decide whatever I choose.... You make the world you live in.... Only you have to live in it.... Provided you can live with the repercussion(of being a bad speller)of your actions, you can decide anything.... ::sorry, this is off the subject:: ::but perhaps Miguel Correa would rather discuss my philosphy:: ::let's not:: p.s. - - - define fascist...you might learn something. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 10:38:32 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: SINBYTE@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) In a message dated 97-01-31 20:00:15 EST, you write: << Until then, you will merely be pissing on a rock and calling it art. >> someday, somewhere, someone...will piss on a rock and call it art. AND...someday, somewhere, someone...will buy it. Breaking down into its most simplistic parts, will reveal the origin of anything...if we are to understand this thing we call art, we have to identify where it comes from. To say that, would be to say that it came from somewhere...that meaning any tangeble or untangeble space...which is, in essence, an origin...or as i have previously stated...the stimuli. sin ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 17:04:07 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: everything old is new again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Don't you people ever make any damn music? Want to buy a copy of my new album? Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 17:04:00 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Well, Sinbyte, if it was all that simple, then not only would amoebae >and protozoan creatures be impressively artistic, but you would have to >say that every cell in your body was involved in its own little >art-world. Actually, I know a lot of people like that. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 09:31:44 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Richard Lahrson Subject: Re: technocomment In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Right. Check out the "so and so's equipment feature in the pop mags. An enitire roomful of gear with brand names that support the rag. Or glitz photos of "big star playing the (insert equipment maker). Its worth noting that the bands or musicans who endorse get to use the equipment for free. They may or may not like it. But prostitutes may or may not enjoy sex. On Sat, 1 Feb 1997, Nick Rothwell wrote: > >Most of the techno and house artists I know amaze me for just the opposite: > >They are able to get sounds out of such a minimal setup that I never thought > >existed. > > The techno artists who get the major coverage in the music equipment > magazines seem to be the ones with the huge piles of gear and with lots of > good things to say about their instruments. I wonder why? > > Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects > http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control > > years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again > ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 13:58:39 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Re: Re FSOL... and possibly a new flamethread MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City wrote: > Ooooh, THERE'S a topic for the list... is it okay to produce music for > live performance with the understanding that its interest may be > ephemeral, because its EXISTENCE is ephemeral, or must everything be > created with the aim of being listened to forever? > > mike Some of the most wonderfull music I have ever heard was improv and absolutly striking moments in my musical developement. I frequently sit in front of one of keyboards and play. I play nothing and everything. I often find something that I truly enjoy. On occassion I use midi to capture the effort but most often I don't. It is a mood and a moment that is passing and the sounds of it will as well. This can sometimes be sad in retrospect. Then I don't forget the moment because I carry a part of the sound with me forever. This is the beauty of it. I think it is perhaps the greatest hour of musical creativity when the notes are catching the very fabric of the time and space it is happening at in that very moment of creation. I'd like to see more improvisational compositions but it isn't going to make anyone rich, nor possibly even feed them. I think its like the people who show up at a concert and scarf at new matterial in favor of something they've already heard. Who can say but it is too bad that the only place to get this type of experience is in smoke filled coffee shops or on street corners and in tiny ampitheatres. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 14:10:12 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Nick Rothwell wrote: > > >Well, Sinbyte, if it was all that simple, then not only would amoebae > >and protozoan creatures be impressively artistic, but you would have to > >say that every cell in your body was involved in its own little > >art-world. > > Actually, I know a lot of people like that. > > Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects > http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control > > years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again I used to think I was a work of art until my wife handed me a mirror. Well, not exactly but I know lots of people that think they are. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 14:29:35 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Sell outs, Prostitution on a note. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I am a little concerned about the tendancy to slap lables on people. What makes a person a sell out? If I were making music that someone liked and would pay me well for then I'd be very happy. If I had to make small changes in order to reach a large enough market to make the money and music a bigger thing than it started out as have I violated some secrite musicians code. I know a band here in town that won the old MTV battle of the band. They hand a few good songs and a record contract that evolved from the offer. The lable wanted to clean up some of the songs so they were more clear and less obscene. They had at least two songs that were awsome but the singer always inserted some crazy shit into the mix so he could appear more wild and crazy. It wasn't part of the music it was just wild garbage he piled into the mix so he seemed intense. He refused to sing the songs the same way each time and refused to not insert unexpected stuff into the lyrics. The lable dropped them and now they have longed disappeared as a band. The great music they had is never to be heard other than in memories and demo tapes. Not one member of the band went on to do anything worth while. They don't even do music in their homes as far as I know. Hey, in terms of the guys who advertise instruments so they can use them for free. So what. I am willing to bet money that at least a few members on this list could be where those guys are if they wanted too. Its a question of what you want. If you make something no one wants to hear its your choice. If you make something everyone wants to hear then again it is your choice. There are alot of variables but in general hardwork and talent will get anyone a little way along the roads they struggle on. I have to think that "sell out" sometimes is a secrit jargon for "you lucky bastard." Life is all about prostitution. It's just a matter of whos getting screwed. I try to stay out of the light and safly guard my .. eh, shell. Big chances only come once in a while and I don't blame the guys who take them at all. If sacrifices are made then they're not the first ones ever made. IT TAKES SACRIFICE TO GET THE CHANCE, THE INSTRUMENTS AND THE MUSIC EVEN ONCE. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 12:10:13 -0700 Reply-To: krikawa@theriver.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Krikawa Subject: Re: everything old is new again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Then again, I seem to get totally ignored because I seem to be too > new'n'weirdish. If I was just recording CD's and tapes and behaving myself, > I'd probably be OK, but because I want to experiment with control systems, > imagery and notions of process, I'm essentially told to fuck off. Not by us, man. krikawa@theriver.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 14:38:39 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Re: Art Discussion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Robert M. Sanders wrote: > > In the end, I don't think "art" is essential. People will have meaning in their > lives without art. For art to have value it must, at least, not get in the > way; it must not impede people from touching the meaning in their own > individual lives. At best, it can coexist with and perhaps occasionally > enhance the lives of people. In the end I think art and music can define the moment and experience. Music has the ability to reach deeply within us and do something to us that is unmistakably human and almost supernatural. This story is wonderful and an example of music of all qualities being art, because real art reaches deeper than the human experience can often quantify, even Mountain Opray. Thanks for sharing the experience thats what I think music is about. The sharing of feelings and experience. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 16:58:46 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Sell outs, Prostitution on a note. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael: I really enjoyed your observations. Here's just a little commentary-- just be aware that in my use of the 'you' literary device, I am not directing this at YOU, but using it to make a hypothetical reference. Michael Millard wrote: > > I am a little concerned about the tendancy to slap lables on > people. What makes a person a sell out? If I were making music that > someone liked and would pay me well for then I'd be very happy. If I > had to make small changes in order to reach a large enough market to > make the money and music a bigger thing than it started out as [then I] have violated some secrite musicians code. I got a secret-musician's-code decoder ring you can borrow that I got in a box of cereal several years ago. Mostly, it spells bullshit.... > I know a band here in town that won the old MTV battle of the > band. They hand a few good songs and a record contract that evolved > from the offer. The lable wanted to clean up some of the songs so they > were more clear and less obscene. They had at least two songs that were > awsome but the singer always inserted some crazy shit into the mix so he > could appear more wild and crazy. It wasn't part of the music it was > just wild garbage he piled into the mix so he seemed intense. He > refused to sing the songs the same way each time and refused to not > insert unexpected stuff into the lyrics. The lable dropped them and now > they have longed disappeared as a band. The great music they had is > never to be heard other than in memories and demo tapes. Not one member > of the band went on to do anything worth while. They don't even do > music in their homes as far as I know. A very common story. Here's a label willing to invest thousands of dollars in you, and time and people -- put a whole organization behind you -- and you thank them by saying, "sorry... you work for me, not the other way around." What egotistic prima-donna gall! So, instead of making money in music (which would supposedly "compromise your art"), you make money in some job that has nothing to do with you OR your art except as it keeps you alive; work for an employer who knows nothing about your art and just expects you to show up on time and do the work you were hired for; and you make all kinds of concessions, and bend all your timetables and schedules and energies to show up on time and do the work you were hired for... and that IS NOT selling out??? Well, it IS selling yourself short, miserably short, and perverting it into a delusion that same is an ego stroke! I come from an art (Fine Art) beginning, and one thing that I believe is held in consensus among the Fine Art crowd is that ego-stuff COMES AFTER the art itself is produced, that it has nothing to do with the creation of the art itself, but a lot to do with the marketing of it afterward. But to get anywhere, that ego-stuff had better be more for-show than real, or nobody will want to work with you. Success in the arts is a team effort, and if you can't be civilized enough to keep people wanting to work with you, you won't get anywhere. If being a well-rounded human being who knows that they ARE a mere human being (and thus attracts friends and supporters and keeps them) is selling out, then I am very happily sold a long time ago. > Hey, in terms of the guys who advertise instruments so they can > use them for free. So what. I am willing to bet money that at least a > few members on this list could be where those guys are if they wanted > too. Its a question of what you want. If you make something no one > wants to hear its your choice. If you make something everyone wants to > hear then again it is your choice. There are alot of variables but in > general hardwork and talent will get anyone a little way along the roads > they struggle on. I have to think that "sell out" sometimes is a secrit > jargon for "you lucky bastard." That is the truth! > Life is all about prostitution. It's just a matter of whos > getting screwed. I try to stay out of the light and safly guard my .. > eh, shell. I don't go along with that. All of my business relationships have been win-win situations throughout my life. I mean that...all of them. As a result, I have never done any of my 'impossible' feats where I alone could take all the credit (though I got it sometimes...) If somebody is being screwed at any stage, you are in an endless screw-loop of screw/screwed, and should extricate yourself. > Big chances only come once in a while and I don't blame the guys > who take them at all. If sacrifices are made then they're not the first > ones ever made. IT TAKES SACRIFICE TO GET THE CHANCE, THE INSTRUMENTS > AND THE MUSIC EVEN ONCE. In the "Pop Music = Trend = Short-lived career" world, big chances come only once. In virtually every other musical-career path, big chances come constantly. Sure, they generally are big in other ways besides merely financial, but that aspect is usually covered adequately or most projects wouldn't be viable. Hard work never gets replaced by lucky breaks. Not entirely, at least. Most lucky breaks lead, in fact, to more hard work than ever bargained for! May be a karma thing. I prefer keeping things a little closer to sane, and have done so. And things just very gently keep going right for me, in context with what I desire from life and art. Think about that next time you think that prostitution is a necessary part of being an artist. Believe me, it ain't. -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 17:28:23 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Re FSOL... and possibly a new flamethread MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael Millard wrote: > > Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City wrote: > > > Ooooh, THERE'S a topic for the list... is it okay to produce music for > > live performance with the understanding that its interest may be > > ephemeral, because its EXISTENCE is ephemeral, or must everything be > > created with the aim of being listened to forever? > > > > mike > > Some of the most wonderfull music I have ever heard was improv and > absolutly striking moments in my musical developement. I frequently sit > in front of one of keyboards and play. I play nothing and everything. > I often find something that I truly enjoy. On occassion I use midi to > capture the effort but most often I don't. It is a mood and a moment > that is passing and the sounds of it will as well. This can sometimes > be sad in retrospect. Then I don't forget the moment because I carry a > part of the sound with me forever. This is the beauty of it. I think > it is perhaps the greatest hour of musical creativity when the notes are > catching the very fabric of the time and space it is happening at in > that very moment of creation. I'd like to see more improvisational > compositions but it isn't going to make anyone rich, nor possibly even > feed them. > I think its like the people who show up at a concert and scarf > at new matterial in favor of something they've already heard. Who can > say but it is too bad that the only place to get this type of experience > is in smoke filled coffee shops or on street corners and in tiny > ampitheatres. Hi Michael. You want to keep this thread alive, eh?! I am one of the very-few electronic composers/artists who I know of (outside of the pop-culture or techno worlds, that is) who performs live at all, and especially who features improvisation (within a context) as part of the performance. Just about all the composers I know personally work in MIDI or in tape... that is, they are studio-oriented composers, and the recording medium is as much an 'instrument' as the synths. About every five years or so, I have felt the call-of-the-crazy-side-of-myself and tried to organize an electronicmusic concert event where other composers were featured. What a waste of time each effort has been. Prying people out of their studios is like ... well ... you know what it's like. :-\ I *have* heard of some "electronic jam sessions" which were truly spontaneous and employed natural instruments as well in an electronicmusic context which made for a truly fantastic performance. But, John Cage is dead now.... OK, I know others are doing it in diverse parts of the world, but very rarely do these events feature more than a single composer performing or even that composer doing much spontaneously (as in, unplanned). The ephemeral, I would think, need not exist in liu of any advance planning, but it just 'feels' like it should attract moments of pure improvisation as part of its ephemeral nature. Since we can be rather massive 'one-man-bands' on a relatively few synths live on stage, ephemeral need not imply 'whimpy,' either! Anyhow, there's some more grist for the mill. (I'm feeling the call-of-the-crazy-side-of-myself rising up just talking about this. Perhaps this is an EVIL thread....) -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 18:01:22 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SINBYTE@AOL.COM wrote: > > In a message dated 97-01-31 20:00:15 EST, you write: > > << Until then, you will merely be pissing on a > rock and calling it art. >> > someday, somewhere, someone...will piss on a rock and call it art. > AND...someday, somewhere, someone...will buy it. > > Breaking down into its most simplistic parts, will reveal the origin of > anything...if we are to understand this thing we call art, we have to > identify where it comes from. To say that, would be to say that it came from > somewhere...that meaning any tangeble or untangeble space...which is, in > essence, an origin...or as i have previously stated...the stimuli. > > sin Apparently, I was too wordy and caused you to miss my point. My response was not about marketing art, it was about creating art, and how much the creative process defines the idea of art itself. Three kinds of art: ART in all-capital letters: art after extensive marketing. Considered valuable at Southeby's auctions and elsewhere. Much magazine and newspaper exposure required. Later, history books. Art starting with a capital letter: art after egomania. Considered valuable to the artist, sometimes extremely so. Sometimes a single work of Art can become the ego-stroke for a lifetime, even if nothing else is ever accomplished. Art demands respect even from people who think it's crap. Pissing on a rock and calling it Art falls into this category, and is often heavily marketed into the aforementioned category later. art in small letters: a miracle of action and reflection and the coordination of billions of life-forms (cells) towards a common goal, driven by constant and spontaneous discovery and combined with earlier experience and knowledge into something never before seen or experienced. Begins with artist acting simultaneously as creator and audience, the art-appreciator having control over the final result. Is followed by the relationship with new observers, who invest their own perceptions and creativity into the work by and through their interpretation on a cerebral and conceptual level only (unless audience involvement is part of the piece). Now, read my comments again, and forget about the rock part. I'll insert some white-space this time. ................. Well, Sinbyte, if it was all that simple, then not only would amoebae and protozoan creatures be impressively artistic, but you would have to say that every cell in your body was involved in its own little art-world. As a highly-developed organism, we have the element of cooperation and task-sharing evident at all times in our systems, and can see that these elements and systems work together towards some degree of an ideal...be that ideal one of temperature or nutrition or non-toxicity or merely homeostasis. All beings have this stimuli/response mechanism in order to relate at-all with the outside environment, ...but in complex systems such as ourselves, the stimuli are experienced on an unimaginable number of levels by an unimaginable number of individual entities...if only taking the brain and its host of cellular specialties into consideration! Thus, the number of possible responses is astronomical, yet still we manage to sift it all out towards a selective number of manageable, idealized responses. The mechanism that accomplishes this feat is working at it every millisecond that you are alive, and it learns, adapts, re-learns, and makes changes in its selections. All this is happening very quickly...much faster than you can perceive. (Check out some P.D. Ouspensky). The closest that you can come to perceiving this mechanism in action UP CLOSE is by being involved in a creative act, or activity. The more absorbed you become in your creating the more you will be 'synched' with the fullness of this thing which you have reduced to being a mere stimuli/response systemology. When your fingers play something beyond your theoretical ability; when your body dances in perfect fluid motion; when your hands and eyes coordinate to bring out of 'nowhere' a visual statement such as a painting or sculpture that has the capability of sending a charge of awe through a huge number of fellow human beings, then you will realize what I am talking about. -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 15:47:28 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Courtney Nielsen Subject: Re: Chord progressions--Is Techno a benefit to culture? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 09:24 AM 2/1/97 -0500, you wrote: >You're right ! > >Many people think it's so easy to compose on a synth or a comp but they never >tried... >I think it's more difficult to compose on a sampling workstation or so >than to compose with a 4-headed rock band, >cause you got almost endless opportunities , sounds etc. > >Makin really good electronic music is really difficult. > Your'e lucky... I got into electronic music cause I was sick of the rock bands I was in. Hey- use that workstation to sample the rock band! ________________________________________ Courtney Nielsen Electronic Artists Collective (408) 275-9972 cnielsen@earthlink.net ________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 10:48:49 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: technocomment MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hello techno-threaders, Nick said > The techno artists who get the major coverage in the music equipment > magazines seem to be the ones with the huge piles of gear and with lots of > good things to say about their instruments. I wonder why? No doubt the magazines are feeding the generally boyish gear-lust that many novices (and some of the more experienced) feel. SOmetimes these magazines are accused of kow-towing to equipment manufacturers. But given that much of the gear that their interview subjects is so old, the manufacturers can't directly benefit from their exposure. Indeed, it might be that such people actually have a disproportionate influence on manufacturers (who, in recent years, have been coming out with the older sounds in their new boxes). I wonder how much use members of the wider emusic community makes of these sounds. Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 15:55:03 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Courtney Nielsen Subject: Re: technocomment Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Well, duh. Of course there are people who love collecting instruments, and there are people who don't know how to go past sound #1 and have lots of money, but because the pop mags feature those artists, that doesnt mean everyone does. Geez. I remember an old friend who would write complete compositions on a mirage. But, i'm not gonna deny it, If I had a chance to buy tons of gear, I would. And so would most of you. Cause making electronic music is what you love. And if YOU could get all that gear for free, would you really say no? At 09:31 AM 2/1/97 -0800, you wrote: >Right. Check out the "so and so's equipment feature in the pop mags. An >enitire roomful of gear with brand names that support the rag. Or glitz >photos of "big star playing the (insert equipment maker). Its worth >noting that the bands or musicans who endorse get to use the equipment >for free. They may or may not like it. But prostitutes may or may not >enjoy sex. > >On Sat, 1 Feb 1997, Nick Rothwell wrote: > >> >Most of the techno and house artists I know amaze me for just the opposite: >> >They are able to get sounds out of such a minimal setup that I never thought >> >existed. >> >> The techno artists who get the major coverage in the music equipment >> magazines seem to be the ones with the huge piles of gear and with lots of >> good things to say about their instruments. I wonder why? >> >> ________________________________________ Courtney Nielsen Electronic Artists Collective (408) 275-9972 cnielsen@earthlink.net ________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 11:00:32 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hello art-lovers, Terry said: > if it was all that simple, then not only would amoebae > and protozoan creatures be impressively artistic, but you would have to > say that every cell in your body was involved in its own little > art-world. This sounds a lot like a number of dance theorists (and Nick Rothwell might have somthing to say about this), who attribute their (or other people's ) impulse to dacne (or just move) to the manifested movement of biological processes. As an example, seek out the writings of Rudolf Laban. It's all very cozy, but fails utterly as a behavioral model. Unfortunately, many of these theorists would have us believe that it is. It seems that Terry's remarks are, if only uninentionally, a criticism of this sort of thinking. Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 16:29:09 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Courtney Nielsen Subject: rock stars with lots of gear Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I have a studio with wall-to-wall gear stacked quite high. I am not a rock star. All of the gear is a result of having partners with lots of gear and picking up new technology as it comes (if it impresses me) and not selling old gear wehenever possible. Now true, I was a teen in the 80's who developed a Duran Duran and Depeche Mode syndrome -mesmirized by how cool it looked to be surrounded by Fairlights and Jupiter-8s, but luckily I wasn't into composing electronic music yet. But now, I don't have lots of gear because I cant program or because Nick Rhodes looked so cool with his monitor glowing behind him, I have lots of gear because the circutry in one synth makes a different sound than the circutry in synth #2. or #3. I keep an old Emax sampler around because of the analog filters, which may do a better job at creating a sound that I am looking for, as opposed to my newer sampler with digital filters, which I have for other reasons. I am very proud of all the gear in my studio. I have never posed in a pop magazine. I am not sponsored. I don't have a video on MTV. But, no, I would not compromise my music in order to obtain more gear. And the only thing I want right now is that new little filter box by Waldorf. Big deal. Oh, and I have considered scaling down, but only because of MIDI headaches. -C ________________________________________ Courtney Nielsen Electronic Artists Collective (408) 275-9972 cnielsen@earthlink.net ________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 16:41:07 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Courtney Nielsen Subject: Re: technocomment Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 10:48 AM 2/2/97 +1000, you wrote: > >No doubt the magazines are feeding the generally boyish gear-lust that many >novices (and some of the more experienced) feel. SOmetimes these magazines >are accused of kow-towing to equipment manufacturers. But given that much >of the gear that their interview subjects is so old, the manufacturers can't >directly benefit from their exposure. Indeed, it might be that such people >actually have a disproportionate influence on manufacturers (who, in recent >years, have been coming out with the older sounds in their new boxes). I >wonder how much use members of the wider emusic community makes of these >sounds. > It seems to me that a lot of the "older-newer" instruments coming out these days seem to come from the discovery of the sounds _after_ the product was discontinued (Roland x0x instruments mainly). Many of these instruments were considered junk when they were new, but when starving musicians found them in junk shops and Goodwills, they discovered new styles to play them in that spawned an incredible demand to bring those instruments back, since there aren't enough of the original instruments to go around (I beleive the avg. price of a TB303 is about $1200 right now. If a pawn shop or a used music instrument store didn't know what it was, they would sell it for about $50). So, now we have the MC303 and the Propellerhead software and the Vintage Keys, etc. ________________________________________ Courtney Nielsen Electronic Artists Collective (408) 275-9972 cnielsen@earthlink.net ________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 22:39:42 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Richard Lahrson Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) In-Reply-To: <01IEXS0TD5EC8WX500@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Art theory I like: The Big Bang: A creator comes along and says it all. His creation is mirrored for some time to come; until the Next Big Bang. This theory finds support in certain painting and music movements. Perhaps the creator was divinely inspired and gives credit to his Maker like J. S. Bach. Rich tripspud@hooked.net ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 00:12:30 -0700 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Steve Sturgess Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Terry Leigh Britton wrote: >SINBYTE@AOL.COM wrote: >> >> In a message dated 97-01-30 17:16:20 EST, you write: >> >> NOTHING IS ART. EVERYTHING IS A RESPONSE TO A STIMULI. A CHEMICAL, >> ELECTRICAL RESPONSE TO A STIMULI. YOU DECIDE THE ORIGIN OF THE ARTISTIC >> CREATIVITY(the stimuli) AND THEN YOU REACT IN THE APPROPRIATE >> MEDIUM(response). I AM NOT AN EXPERT, NOR INTELLECT, NOR PHILOSIPHER, NOT >> MUSICIAN, OR PAINTER, OR PHOTOGRAPHER, I AM ME. I HAVE DECIDED THAT: >> >> ART >> IS >> A >> RESPONSE >> >> OPEN EARS, >> SINBYTE > > >Well, Sinbyte, if it was all that simple, then not only would amoebae >and protozoan creatures be impressively artistic, but you would have to >say that every cell in your body was involved in its own little >art-world. The closest that you >can come to perceiving this mechanism in action UP CLOSE is by being >involved in a creative act, or activity. The more absorbed you become in >your creating the more you will be 'synched' with the fullness of this >thing which you have reduced to being a mere stimuli/response >systemology. When your fingers play something beyond your theoretical >ability; when your body dances in perfect fluid motion; when your hands >and eyes coordinate to bring out of 'nowhere' a visual statement such as >a painting or sculpture that has the capability of sending a charge of >awe through a huge number of fellow human beings, then you will realize >what I am talking about. Until then, you will merely be pissing on a >rock and calling it art. >-- > >Terry Leigh Britton > I wholeheartedly agree. To the best of my knowledge, humans are the only species that have a construct that remotely approachs 'ART'. My dog has never expressed his opinion on my music, at least to date. But art is something that is not easy to define. I know that I can give many technical opinions on what is right or wrong with a piece of music, I know I can explain precisely why I like (or don't like) a piece of music, I know that some music I write I like (and sometimes not) and believe I understand the creative process. But still there is something about some works of art of one kind or another that moves something in me; that touchs an emotion or memory. That, to me, is the true meaning of art, something that we don't share with other species. As we are all unique individuals, we all have different memories and experiences and so we all have different tastes. So what is art to me, is not art to someone else, maybe ANYONE else. That is what makes the world so interesting... and this discussion. Keep it up everyone. Steve Sturgess ssturges@oanet.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 17:57:00 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Verraes Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SINBYTE@AOL.COM wrote : > In a message dated 97-02-01 04:51:53 EST, you write: > > << > If art was _only_ a response to these stimuli, we wouldn't have a > discussion at all. Sometimes I actually wish the definition was that > simple. But the society changes, ergo art changes, ergo the definition of > art changes. > >> > > To me, it seems the point of discussion, would be to understand the stimuli. > For then, we would be able to understand the response. For example: > > HARD TIMES ~~~> > HARD LIFE ~~~> > ANGRY YOUTH~~> > ANGRY MUSIC(art?) > > bad example, but it's easiest to express. > ??????? That's my take on the situation.... Art is a response to stimuli, but it's more than that. I'm not making art (trying to make art) because of some good or bad experience I want to talk about. I just feel that making art is something that gives my life an extra value. _____________________ Mathias Verraes eat.my.shorts@glo.be _____________________ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 12:16:28 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: SINBYTE@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) i pissed on a rock yesterday...wanna buy it? j/k i'm not disagreeing with you... in fact, i feel as though you are furthering my point... although, i wasn't so wordy... i made my point simplistic... which is the point... simplistic... stimuli~~~>response regardless of number of responses... it is still a response... broken down thousands of time... do you get it? anyone have any idea what i'm talking about? or a better way to express my point? ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 12:26:37 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: SINBYTE@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) In a message dated 97-02-02 02:34:32 EST, you write: << So what is art to me, is not art to someone else, maybe ANYONE else. That is what makes the world so interesting... and this discussion. Keep it up everyone. >> perhaps this is why we agree and disagree on the same plane. let us also not forget that we are using the bastardized american language, which is not very suited for discussion. way too limited. that is why i write. sin ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 17:52:58 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >I wholeheartedly agree. To the best of my knowledge, humans are the only >species that have a construct that remotely approachs 'ART'. Nope: bower birds do as well. (And, it could be said, for the same reasons we do.) Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 17:53:11 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Re FSOL... and possibly a new flamethread Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Just about all the composers I know personally >work in MIDI or in tape... that is, they are studio-oriented composers This is not a personal criticism, just a generic complaint I voice from time to time, but why does MIDI imply studio work? MIDI was designed as a performance protocol. Even today, 14 years on, it is excellent as such, in conjunction with decent control surfaces, a good software control package and responsive instruments. I consider it to be little short of a tragedy that nobody seems capable of realising what seems to be self-evident. Maybe it's just me. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 17:52:21 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: The post-toys phase (Re: technocomment) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >And if YOU could get all that gear for free, would you really say no? Hard to be definitive on such a wild "what-if?", but I really think I would. I went through the More Bigger Toys phase sometime around 8-10 years ago. It was important - I needed to get sufficient power to do live performances, and the lack of decent multitimbral instruments meant that lots of boxes were needed. And back then I believed that having a lot of gear on stage was cool. Maybe I'm just getting old, but gear lust really don't affect me any more. The main reason is that the hassle factor just gets worse and worse. I don't upgrade any of my music software because the newer stuff is always less reliable than the older stuff, and I never upgrade my computer hardware for the same reason. You have to balance the potential utility (and sexiness) of any new instrument or package against the hassle it can cause as it breaks everything you have already, including mindset. And lately, the hassle factor of the products on the market just seems far too high for them to interest me much. (I'm not talking about learning curve, but something else which I can't describe, something akin to metaphoric clutter.) And insisting on products which work properly really does a good job of keeping the shopping list short. Nowadays I believe that having very little gear on stage is cool. But it has to be well-chosen and individualistic. A single 01/W or N-series keyboard is and always will be naff, but a Thunder and two Wavestation A/D's is more than enough for the sort of live work I do, and it's the sort of setup which fits into my head. Sure, there are things I want to buy, and probably will do: I'd like to have a go with a ProMix instead of the DMP7, and a DP/4+ or equivalent effects processor would help me a lot. And the Micro-Wave II interests me as a potential purchase in a year or so. But apart from that nothing at all comes to mind, and I am trying to think of things. What would I do with an entire studio full of gear? Noodle for a bit and get nothing done, that's what. I still buy the magazines (Future Music, Sound On Sound, Keyboard) but only really because I periodically write articles and need to keep a fingerhold on the technology. And the technology does fascinate me. But that doesn't mean I want it in my house. Maybe this links in with Eric's comments on depth versus breadth of electronic music. The instrument industry is just that - an industry - and it (and the media) have a huge vested interest in keeping the artform broad rather than deep. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 13:11:33 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Steve Sturgess wrote: > > Terry Leigh Britton wrote: > > >SINBYTE@AOL.COM wrote: > >> > >> In a message dated 97-01-30 17:16:20 EST, you write: > >> > >> NOTHING IS ART. EVERYTHING IS A RESPONSE TO A STIMULI. A CHEMICAL, > >> ELECTRICAL RESPONSE TO A STIMULI. YOU DECIDE THE ORIGIN OF THE ARTISTIC > >> CREATIVITY(the stimuli) AND THEN YOU REACT IN THE APPROPRIATE > >> MEDIUM(response). I AM NOT AN EXPERT, NOR INTELLECT, NOR PHILOSIPHER, NOT > >> MUSICIAN, OR PAINTER, OR PHOTOGRAPHER, I AM ME. I HAVE DECIDED THAT: > >> > >> ART > >> IS > >> A > >> RESPONSE > >> > >> OPEN EARS, > >> SINBYTE > > > > > >Well, Sinbyte, if it was all that simple, then not only would amoebae > >and protozoan creatures be impressively artistic, but you would have to > >say that every cell in your body was involved in its own little > >art-world. The closest that you > >can come to perceiving this mechanism in action UP CLOSE is by being > >involved in a creative act, or activity. The more absorbed you become in > >your creating the more you will be 'synched' with the fullness of this > >thing which you have reduced to being a mere stimuli/response > >systemology. When your fingers play something beyond your theoretical > >ability; when your body dances in perfect fluid motion; when your hands > >and eyes coordinate to bring out of 'nowhere' a visual statement such as > >a painting or sculpture that has the capability of sending a charge of > >awe through a huge number of fellow human beings, then you will realize > >what I am talking about. Until then, you will merely be pissing on a > >rock and calling it art. > >-- > > > >Terry Leigh Britton > > > I wholeheartedly agree. To the best of my knowledge, humans are the only > species that have a construct that remotely approachs 'ART'. My dog has > never expressed his opinion on my music, at least to date. > > But art is something that is not easy to define. I know that I can give > many technical opinions on what is right or wrong with a piece of music, I > know I can explain precisely why I like (or don't like) a piece of music, I > know that some music I write I like (and sometimes not) and believe I > understand the creative process. But still there is something about some > works of art of one kind or another that moves something in me; that touchs > an emotion or memory. That, to me, is the true meaning of art, something > that we don't share with other species. As we are all unique individuals, > we all have different memories and experiences and so we all have different > tastes. So what is art to me, is not art to someone else, maybe ANYONE > else. That is what makes the world so interesting... and this discussion. > Keep it up everyone. > > Steve Sturgess > ssturges@oanet.com I find it interesting to note that in terms of human evolution that species like Cro-Magnon were declared pre-modern-human from almost the beginning of their discovery because they seem to been inclinded toward art, as in cave paintings. It is also important to discuss in these terms that Neanderthal who apparently had larger brain cavities may have been logisticly superior to their pre-human peers they failed to win. Cro-Magnon and Neandertal both used clever tool sets and both cpmpeted in overlapping areas. The Cro-Magnon man has been identified as having a smaller mental capacity but the distinct ability and apperant need for creative abstaction. This is displayed in the art they left behind but certainly played a part in the servival of the species and ultimatly our own. It is the creative, abstract thinking of humankind I argue that has put us where we are. In a very real way a large part of our world is creativity and abstracion. The need to go beyond what we have and do more. This applies to the creation of a aircraft, a car, a new drug ( good or bad ), and a simple melody that plays in the back of our head. It is all distinctly human. Sorry if I got a little off the Emusic track. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 17:52:28 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >This sounds a lot like a number of dance theorists (and Nick Rothwell might >have somthing to say about this) You're way ahead of me, David. However, I was just being catty. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 17:53:17 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: technocomment Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >SOmetimes these magazines >are accused of kow-towing to equipment manufacturers. But given that much >of the gear that their interview subjects is so old, the manufacturers can't >directly benefit from their exposure. They can indirectly benefit. It's called branding in the marketing and publicity world. Roland have a very strong reputation in the dance scene right now, and it's nothing to do with their current product range. This is bound to rub off on their current sales. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 14:25:34 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii What is a Bower Bird? ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 14:50:54 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Re FSOL... and possibly a new flamethread MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nick Rothwell wrote: > > >Just about all the composers I know personally > >work in MIDI or in tape... that is, they are studio-oriented composers > > This is not a personal criticism, just a generic complaint I voice from > time to time, but why does MIDI imply studio work? > > MIDI was designed as a performance protocol. Even today, 14 years on, it is > excellent as such, in conjunction with decent control surfaces, a good > software control package and responsive instruments. I consider it to be > little short of a tragedy that nobody seems capable of realising what seems > to be self-evident. > > Maybe it's just me. > > Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects > http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control > > years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again You bet! It amazes me that more people don't jump into MIDI expressedly to do live performance. Instead, it has become a new format of audio-cable into the recorder/sequencer. The first thing I do when I get a new instrument is to master its sysex and control signals, and any external inputs and outputs the device may have besides the MIDI ones. These are what really define the performance power of my machine, and are the areas I focus upon improving my 'chops' with. So, as you say elsewhere, keeping it simple is increasingly important if I want to know what's going on, and what I have available to set up quickly in a live context. Also, you mentioned the bower birds of Australia & New Guinea... here is a link for the unacquainted: http://www.dap.csiro.au:80/OPTECH/Optics-Radiometry/bower.html This is a short, sweet introduction and should be read to the end. And I do not produce art just to 'get a little,' Nick! :) -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 15:00:26 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SINBYTE@AOL.COM wrote: > > i pissed on a rock yesterday...wanna buy it? > > j/k > > i'm not disagreeing with you... > in fact, i feel as though you are furthering my point... > although, i wasn't so wordy... > i made my point simplistic... > which is the point... > simplistic... > stimuli~~~>response > regardless of number of responses... > it is still a response... > broken down thousands of time... > do you get it? > anyone have any idea what i'm talking about? > or a better way to express my point? Oh, yeah... atomics and all that... sure, now I get it. Protons and electons and stuff. Broken down thousands, millions, billions, trillions, quintillions, quadrillions, etc. of times. I forgot how simplistic the world really was there for a moment. -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 15:01:22 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael Millard wrote: > > What is a Bower Bird? Heh, heh.... again: http://www.dap.csiro.au:80/OPTECH/Optics-Radiometry/bower.html ! -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 15:09:01 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SINBYTE@AOL.COM wrote: > > In a message dated 97-01-31 20:00:15 EST, you write: > > << Until then, you will merely be pissing on a > rock and calling it art. >> > someday, somewhere, someone...will piss on a rock and call it art. > AND...someday, somewhere, someone...will buy it. > > Breaking down into its most simplistic parts, will reveal the origin of > anything...if we are to understand this thing we call art, we have to > identify where it comes from. To say that, would be to say that it came from > somewhere...that meaning any tangeble or untangeble space...which is, in > essence, an origin...or as i have previously stated...the stimuli. > > sin Apparently, I was too wordy and caused you to miss my point. My response was not about marketing art, it was about creating art, and how much the creative process defines the idea of art itself. Three kinds of art: ART in all-capital letters: art after extensive marketing. Considered valuable at Southeby's auctions and elsewhere. Much magazine and newspaper exposure required. Later, history books. Art starting with a capital letter: art after egomania. Considered valuable to the artist, sometimes extremely so. Sometimes a single work of Art can become the ego-stroke for a lifetime, even if nothing else is ever accomplished. Art demands respect even from people who think it's crap. Pissing on a rock and calling it Art falls into this category, and is often heavily marketed into the aforementioned category later. art in small letters: a miracle of action and reflection and the coordination of billions of life-forms (cells) towards a common goal, driven by constant and spontaneous discovery and combined with earlier experience and knowledge into something never before seen or experienced. Begins with artist acting simultaneously as creator and audience, the art-appreciator having control over the final result. Is followed by the relationship with new observers, who invest their own perceptions and creativity into the work by and through their interpretation on a cerebral and conceptual level only (unless audience involvement is part of the piece). Now, read my comments again, and forget about the rock part. I'll insert some white-space this time. ................. Well, Sinbyte, if it was all that simple, then not only would amoebae and protozoan creatures be impressively artistic, but you would have to say that every cell in your body was involved in its own little art-world. As a highly-developed organism, we have the element of cooperation and task-sharing evident at all times in our systems, and can see that these elements and systems work together towards some degree of an ideal...be that ideal one of temperature or nutrition or non-toxicity or merely homeostasis. All beings have this stimuli/response mechanism in order to relate at-all with the outside environment, ...but in complex systems such as ourselves, the stimuli are experienced on an unimaginable number of levels by an unimaginable number of individual entities...if only taking the brain and its host of cellular specialties into consideration! Thus, the number of possible responses is astronomical, yet still we manage to sift it all out towards a selective number of manageable, idealized responses. The mechanism that accomplishes this feat is working at it every millisecond that you are alive, and it learns, adapts, re-learns, and makes changes in its selections. All this is happening very quickly...much faster than you can perceive. (Check out some P.D. Ouspensky). The closest that you can come to perceiving this mechanism in action UP CLOSE is by being involved in a creative act, or activity. The more absorbed you become in your creating the more you will be 'synched' with the fullness of this thing which you have reduced to being a mere stimuli/response systemology. When your fingers play something beyond your theoretical ability; when your body dances in perfect fluid motion; when your hands and eyes coordinate to bring out of 'nowhere' a visual statement such as a painting or sculpture that has the capability of sending a charge of awe through a huge number of fellow human beings, then you will realize what I am talking about. ..................................................................... -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 15:11:46 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Sell outs, Prostitution on a note. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael: I really enjoyed your observations. Here's just a little commentary-- just be aware that in my use of the 'you' literary device, I am not directing this at YOU, but using it to make a hypothetical reference. Michael Millard wrote: > > I am a little concerned about the tendancy to slap lables on > people. What makes a person a sell out? If I were making music that > someone liked and would pay me well for then I'd be very happy. If I > had to make small changes in order to reach a large enough market to > make the money and music a bigger thing than it started out as [then I] have violated some secrite musicians code. I got a secret-musician's-code decoder ring you can borrow that I got in a box of cereal several years ago. Mostly, it spells bullshit.... > I know a band here in town that won the old MTV battle of the > band. They hand a few good songs and a record contract that evolved > from the offer. The lable wanted to clean up some of the songs so they > were more clear and less obscene. They had at least two songs that were > awsome but the singer always inserted some crazy shit into the mix so he > could appear more wild and crazy. It wasn't part of the music it was > just wild garbage he piled into the mix so he seemed intense. He > refused to sing the songs the same way each time and refused to not > insert unexpected stuff into the lyrics. The lable dropped them and now > they have longed disappeared as a band. The great music they had is > never to be heard other than in memories and demo tapes. Not one member > of the band went on to do anything worth while. They don't even do > music in their homes as far as I know. A very common story. Here's a label willing to invest thousands of dollars in you, and time and people -- put a whole organization behind you -- and you thank them by saying, "sorry... you work for me, not the other way around." What egotistic prima-donna gall! So, instead of making money in music (which would supposedly "compromise your art"), you make money in some job that has nothing to do with you OR your art except as it keeps you alive; work for an employer who knows nothing about your art and just expects you to show up on time and do the work you were hired for; and you make all kinds of concessions, and bend all your timetables and schedules and energies to show up on time and do the work you were hired for... and that IS NOT selling out??? Well, it IS selling yourself short, miserably short, and perverting it into a delusion that same is an ego stroke! I come from an art (Fine Art) beginning, and one thing that I believe is held in consensus among the Fine Art crowd is that ego-stuff COMES AFTER the art itself is produced, that it has nothing to do with the creation of the art itself, but a lot to do with the marketing of it afterward. But to get anywhere, that ego-stuff had better be more for-show than real, or nobody will want to work with you. Success in the arts is a team effort, and if you can't be civilized enough to keep people wanting to work with you, you won't get anywhere. If being a well-rounded human being who knows that they ARE a mere human being (and thus attracts friends and supporters and keeps them) is selling out, then I am very happily sold a long time ago. > Hey, in terms of the guys who advertise instruments so they can > use them for free. So what. I am willing to bet money that at least a > few members on this list could be where those guys are if they wanted > too. Its a question of what you want. If you make something no one > wants to hear its your choice. If you make something everyone wants to > hear then again it is your choice. There are alot of variables but in > general hardwork and talent will get anyone a little way along the roads > they struggle on. I have to think that "sell out" sometimes is a secrit > jargon for "you lucky bastard." That is the truth! > Life is all about prostitution. It's just a matter of whos > getting screwed. I try to stay out of the light and safly guard my .. > eh, shell. I don't go along with that. All of my business relationships have been win-win situations throughout my life. I mean that...all of them. As a result, I have never done any of my 'impossible' feats where I alone could take all the credit (though I got it sometimes...) If somebody is being screwed at any stage, you are in an endless screw-loop of screw/screwed, and should extricate yourself. > Big chances only come once in a while and I don't blame the guys > who take them at all. If sacrifices are made then they're not the first > ones ever made. IT TAKES SACRIFICE TO GET THE CHANCE, THE INSTRUMENTS > AND THE MUSIC EVEN ONCE. In the "Pop Music = Trend = Short-lived career" world, big chances come only once. In virtually every other musical-career path, big chances come constantly. Sure, they generally are big in other ways besides merely financial, but that aspect is usually covered adequately or most projects wouldn't be viable. Hard work never gets replaced by lucky breaks. Not entirely, at least. Most lucky breaks lead, in fact, to more hard work than ever bargained for! May be a karma thing. I prefer keeping things a little closer to sane, and have done so. And things just very gently keep going right for me, in context with what I desire from life and art. Think about that next time you think that prostitution is a necessary part of being an artist. Believe me, it ain't. -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ (This is a repost, as I was just informed that our server was barely sending mail again last night.) ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 15:41:55 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: SINBYTE@AOL.COM Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) In a message dated 97-02-02 15:14:24 EST, you write: << Oh, yeah... atomics and all that... sure, now I get it. Protons and electons and stuff. Broken down thousands, millions, billions, trillions, quintillions, quadrillions, etc. of times. I forgot how simplistic the world really was there for a moment. >> if a packet on a pocket hits a socket on a port and your floppy does abort..... electron a and electron b walk into a bar....... midi thru... sin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 00:03:23 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Kevin Begley Subject: Re: Radio Croatia Petition Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 15.37 1997-01-31 -0500, you wrote: >On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Verraes wrote: > >> >Dear Friends of Art and Technology, >> > >> >Peace! Please help save Radio 101 in Zagreb, Croatia from being >> >canceled!!! >> > >> >Just add your name to the list and send the message to everyone you >> > know. This message is brought to you by the letter "H" (for HELP) and >> >the number "1,000,000" (for the number of names we want to sign). >> > >> >This is a petition to save Radio 101 in Zagreb, Croatia. ALL YOU DO >> > IS ADD YOUR NAME TO THE LIST AT THE BOTTOM, then forward it to everyone >> >you >> >know. >> > >> >If you have any reservations about signing this, please first view the >> >wonderful KidCast For Peace web site created by the Children of Croatia; >> >http://www.hrvatska.com/kidcast/index.html. >> > >> >Your signature will help insure that the right for creative expression is >> >upheld globally. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>---------------------FWD-------------------------------- >> > >> > Croatian "democracy" goverment believes that this radio station is >> >dealing against state, while this is the ONLY station left which >> > is dealing with democracy information in Croatia! >> > >> > Please add your name to this list if you believe in what we stand >> > for. This list will be forwarded to the Goverment of the Republic >> >Croatia! >> > >> > If you happen to be the 50th, 100th, 150th, etc. signer of this >> > petition, please forward to: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> root@r101.com.hr and >> >>>>>> www-admin@vlada.hr >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> This way we can keep track of the lists and organize them. >> >>>>>> >> > >> > Please forward this to everyone you know, and help us to keep >> >this radio station ALIVE!. >> > >> > Thank you. >> > >> >>>>>> SIGNATURES >> >>>>>> 1. Drago Markovic, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>> 2. Sanda Petris, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>> 3. Antun Sunjic, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>> 4. Maja Dawidowsky, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>> 5. Maja Vickovic, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>> 6. Vladimir Vuksan, Albuquerque, USA >> >>>>>> 7. Bruno Scap, Chico, USA >> >>>>>> 8. Bruno Ancic,Zagreb,Croatia >> >>>>>> 9. Lovro Seder, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>10.Nikola Fox, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>12. Neven Jacmenovic, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>13. Daniel Kasaj, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>14. Koraljka Haberle, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>15. Darko Bunic, Koprivnica, Croatia >> >>>>>>16. Lidija Kesak, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>17. Robert Petracic, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>18. Renata Marusic, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>19. Mirana Koljatic, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>20. Rima Venturin, Skjetten, Norway >> >>>>>>21. Dario Filjar, Athlone, Ireland >> >>>>>>22. Alan Skarica, Zagreb, >> >>>>>>22. Alan Skarica, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>23. Dario Mavric, Sisak, Croatia >> >>>>>>24. Drazen Stolar, Osijek, Croatia >> >>>>>>25. Alan Jobst, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>26. Maja Cepak, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>27. Eta Paro Crnosija, Zagreb, Croatia >> >>>>>>28. Maja Veldt-Poklepovic, Amsterdam, Nederland >> >>>>>>29. Piet Veldt, Amsterdam, Nederland >> >>>>>>30. Zvonimir Bakotin, Amsterdam, Nederland >> >>>>>>31. Paul Garrin, NYC, USA >> >>>>>>32. Johnny Temple, NYC >> >>>>>>33. Dolf Hermannstaedter, Augsburg, Germany >> >>>>>>34. Berry Evers, Amsterdam, Holland >> >>>>>>35. Jerry Goossens, Utrecht, Holland >> >>>>>>36. Linda Lindmark, Goteborg, Sweden >> >>>>>>37. Jesper Lundqvist, Umeo, Sweden >> >>>>>>38. Fredrik Norberg, V=A6xj=D6, Sweden >> >>>>>>39. Elisabet Wahl, V=A6xj=D6, Sweden. >> >>>>>>40. Gabriella Stenberg, Stockholm, Sweden >> >>>>>>41. Bibbi Johansson, Stockholm,Sweden >> >>>>>>42. Susanne Wixe, Stockholm, Sweden >> >>>>>>43. Claes Leo Lindwall, Stockholm, Sweden >> >>>>>>44. Lena Nilsson, Stockholm, Sweden >> >>>>>>45. Jonas Cohen, Stockholm, Sweden >> >>>>>>46. Bjorn Nyblom, Stockholm, Sweden >> >>>>>>47. Per Schlingmann, Sweden >> >>>>>>48. Jonas Palmqvist, Sweden >> >>>>>>49. Jonas Hjelm, Sweden >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>50. Robert Magnusson, Sweden >> >>>>>>51. Elisabet Limmerg-rd, Lund, Sweden >> >>>>>>52. Cecilia Widegren, Lundsbrunn, Sweden >> >>>>>>53. Rolf K Nilsson, H+rn+sand, Sweden >> >>>>>>54. Maria L. Ekstrand, San Francisco CA USA >> >>>>>>55. Francis R. Abueg, Palo Alto CA USA >> >>>>>>56. Michael Acree, San Francisco, CA, USA >> >>>>>>57. Dori Dysland, Silver Spring, MD, USA >> >>>>>>58. David A. Jones Portland OR. America >> >>>>>>59. Sonja Straub, Portland, OR. USA >> >>>>>>60. Lily Vassiliou, Portland, OR, USA >> >>>>>>61. Stan Siver, Port Townsend, WA, USA >> >>>>>>62. Paul McIsaac, New York, NY, USA >> >>>>>>63. John Douglas, Charlotte, VT,USA >> >>>>>>64. Jon Leland, Mill Valley, CA, USA >> >>>>>>65. Peter H. Rosen, San Francisco, CA USA >> >>>>>>66. Laura-Doe Harris, Mullumbimby, NSW Australia >> >>>>>>67. Barbara Carrellas, New York, NY, USA >> >>>>>>68. Chester Mainard, San Francisco, CA USA >> >>>>>69. Keith Hennessy, San Francisco, CA USA >> >>>>70. Dianne Monroe, Atlanta, GA USA >> >>>>71. David Reiffel, Boston, MA USA >> >>>>72. Mary-Ann Greanier, Plainville, MA USA >> >>73.sam auinger,linz,austria >> >>74. chris salter, San Francisco, CA USA >> >>75. laura farabough >> >>76. Morgan Jenness, New York, NY >> >>78. Randy Gener, New York City, NY >> >>79. Tom Robinson, London, UK >> 80. David Holloway, Australia >> 81. Mathias Verraes, Belgium >> 82. Corey H Maass, NYC >> 83. Kevin Begley, Sweden ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 16:01:51 -0700 Reply-To: krikawa@theriver.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Krikawa Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > What is a Bower Bird? > Heh, heh.... again: > > http://www.dap.csiro.au:80/OPTECH/Optics-Radiometry/bower.html So, perhaps, artistic they are. May we equate e-musicians with the bower? Frolicking about our little studios for a good part of the year -- preparing, building, laying out morsels heard wildly in the night air. (Waiting to get screwed by a plump label exec.) Bashing about, sometimes stealing others' equipment, and ideas? . . . obviously I enjoyed the tangential inferences of the thread. . . . and I am most likely inclined to think that the whole idea of someone confused about what ART/Art/art Is, is faulted only by my inability to really give a shit. People do whatever they want in life; some if it's cool, exciting, inventive, beautiful; some of it's boring, inane, self-indulgent; whatever. I can kind-of understand what Sin is saying, but it doesn't make it meaningful under my inflicted mental roof. -john krikawa@theriver.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 10:26:06 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Clive McFarland Subject: Re: arpeggiators In-Reply-To: <32F20A72.185@voy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >So is the Cyclone still available new? What sorts of prices are they >going for? Is it weird enough to be useless in real life? Or indeed, is is weird enough to be useful in real life? Regards Clive Clive McFarland CSIRO Australia clive@pelican.dbe.csiro.au ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 10:28:43 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Clive McFarland Subject: Re: technocomment In-Reply-To: <199702012355.PAA21860@greece.it.earthlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" And if YOU could get all that gear for free, would >you really say no? Depends on what price you have to pay. Regards Clive Clive McFarland CSIRO Australia clive@pelican.dbe.csiro.au ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 20:18:35 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Cheryl H. Korn" Subject: cancel subscription pls please cancel my subscription..... thx! ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 23:02:26 -0500 Reply-To: jfm-3@ix.netcom.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe Miklojcik Organization: http://www.netcom.com/~jfm-3/grim.html Subject: Ways of working [ Was: Re: Re FSOL... and possibly a new flamethread] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (I have my tongue halfway in my cheek, you just can't see it.) Nick Rothwell wrote: > > >Just about all the composers I know personally > >work in MIDI or in tape... that is, they are studio-oriented > >composers > > This is not a personal criticism, just a generic complaint I voice > from > time to time, but why does MIDI imply studio work? > > MIDI was designed as a performance protocol. Even today, 14 years on, > it is > excellent as such, in conjunction with decent control surfaces, a good > software control package and responsive instruments. I consider it to > be > little short of a tragedy that nobody seems capable of realising what > seems > to be self-evident. > > Maybe it's just me. Nope, it's JUST THE TWO OF US. That's why we have EVIL TREES. (My tongue is better now.) We do seem to part ways at the point where samples get burned into ROM, however. I really hate it when they do that to otherwise excellent synthesis engines. You (and others here) think of this as an asthetic, or a way of working, that frees you from a certain level of detail. In my way of working, I don't feel like I'm *exploiting* the medium to its full potential unless I have RAM. I start with a directory of raw audio clips in my PC, edit them into "processed textures" or "percussive hits" (somewhat arbitrary groupings that happen to work for me) and load them into my sampler. I then connect as many EVIL TREE control surfaces to realtime DSP in the sampler, for performance purposes. MIDI continuous controller resolution often bites me here. (Wow, I hope I didn't just start that whole crazy thread again.) Also, I think I'm finding that "distancing tools" doesn't work for my conceptual model of "effects", aside from the fact that a reverb kinda makes it sound like the thing making sound is further away. I always wind up thinking about them as "synthesis tools" which due to technological constraints happen in a more blanket way than the more fiddly functions for manipulating individual samples. Then again, I rarely use reverb. All of this, save for the creation of the original sample set, and control-to-DSP mapping, happens in real time. Naturally, I rely on an obscenely large sample set and robust sample-DSP-function set to get around that limitation. MIDI is certainly the least of my performance worries. Perhaps many are not as brave as you, feeling that a PowerBook running MAX is just too fragile? I do it without MAX, or a laptop, so perhaps not. I'm very interested in hearing your album, Nick. When will there be an URL listing a physical address to send a carefully wrapped wad of bills to? I'm also interested in hearing about other conceptual models for the space in between the music and the machines. I hope that's on-topic. -- Joe Miklojcik Grim Determination Research Labs PS: I found that a trick to playing the Thunder is to imagine that the surface is about an inch below where it actually is. It helps a lot. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 09:46:00 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: The post-toys phase (Re: technocomment) In-Reply-To: from "Nick Rothwell" at Feb 2, 97 05:52:21 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > Nowadays I believe that having very little gear on stage is cool. But it > has to be well-chosen and individualistic. A single 01/W or N-series > keyboard is and always will be naff, but a Thunder and two Wavestation > A/D's is more than enough for the sort of live work I do, and it's the sort > of setup which fits into my head. > Naffness depends on the performer. Laurie Anderson held Metlay and I (and a large audience) spellbound using a DAT deck, a M1, and a voice processor. --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 14:54:24 GMT Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: vieir henrichson jeorge Subject: Re: Radio Croatia Petition Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 00:03 03/02/97 +0100, you wrote: >At 15.37 1997-01-31 -0500, you wrote: >>On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Verraes wrote: >> >>> >Dear Friends of Art and Technology, >>> > >>> >Peace! Please help save Radio 101 in Zagreb, Croatia from being >>> >canceled!!! >>> > >>> >Just add your name to the list and send the message to everyone you >>> > know. This message is brought to you by the letter "H" (for HELP) and >>> >the number "1,000,000" (for the number of names we want to sign). >>> > >>> >This is a petition to save Radio 101 in Zagreb, Croatia. ALL YOU DO >>> > IS ADD YOUR NAME TO THE LIST AT THE BOTTOM, then forward it to everyone >>> >you >>> >know. >>> > >>> >If you have any reservations about signing this, please first view the >>> >wonderful KidCast For Peace web site created by the Children of Croatia; >>> >http://www.hrvatska.com/kidcast/index.html. >>> > >>> >Your signature will help insure that the right for creative expression is >>> >upheld globally. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>>---------------------FWD-------------------------------- >>> > >>> > Croatian "democracy" goverment believes that this radio station is >>> >dealing against state, while this is the ONLY station left which >>> > is dealing with democracy information in Croatia! >>> > >>> > Please add your name to this list if you believe in what we stand >>> > for. This list will be forwarded to the Goverment of the Republic >>> >Croatia! >>> > >>> > If you happen to be the 50th, 100th, 150th, etc. signer of this >>> > petition, please forward to: >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> root@r101.com.hr and >>> >>>>>> www-admin@vlada.hr >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> This way we can keep track of the lists and organize them. >>> >>>>>> >>> > >>> > Please forward this to everyone you know, and help us to keep >>> >this radio station ALIVE!. >>> > >>> > Thank you. >>> > >>> >>>>>> SIGNATURES >>> >>>>>> 1. Drago Markovic, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>> 2. Sanda Petris, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>> 3. Antun Sunjic, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>> 4. Maja Dawidowsky, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>> 5. Maja Vickovic, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>> 6. Vladimir Vuksan, Albuquerque, USA >>> >>>>>> 7. Bruno Scap, Chico, USA >>> >>>>>> 8. Bruno Ancic,Zagreb,Croatia >>> >>>>>> 9. Lovro Seder, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>10.Nikola Fox, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>12. Neven Jacmenovic, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>13. Daniel Kasaj, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>14. Koraljka Haberle, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>15. Darko Bunic, Koprivnica, Croatia >>> >>>>>>16. Lidija Kesak, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>17. Robert Petracic, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>18. Renata Marusic, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>19. Mirana Koljatic, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>20. Rima Venturin, Skjetten, Norway >>> >>>>>>21. Dario Filjar, Athlone, Ireland >>> >>>>>>22. Alan Skarica, Zagreb, >>> >>>>>>22. Alan Skarica, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>23. Dario Mavric, Sisak, Croatia >>> >>>>>>24. Drazen Stolar, Osijek, Croatia >>> >>>>>>25. Alan Jobst, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>26. Maja Cepak, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>27. Eta Paro Crnosija, Zagreb, Croatia >>> >>>>>>28. Maja Veldt-Poklepovic, Amsterdam, Nederland >>> >>>>>>29. Piet Veldt, Amsterdam, Nederland >>> >>>>>>30. Zvonimir Bakotin, Amsterdam, Nederland >>> >>>>>>31. Paul Garrin, NYC, USA >>> >>>>>>32. Johnny Temple, NYC >>> >>>>>>33. Dolf Hermannstaedter, Augsburg, Germany >>> >>>>>>34. Berry Evers, Amsterdam, Holland >>> >>>>>>35. Jerry Goossens, Utrecht, Holland >>> >>>>>>36. Linda Lindmark, Goteborg, Sweden >>> >>>>>>37. Jesper Lundqvist, Umeo, Sweden >>> >>>>>>38. Fredrik Norberg, V=A6xj=D6, Sweden >>> >>>>>>39. Elisabet Wahl, V=A6xj=D6, Sweden. >>> >>>>>>40. Gabriella Stenberg, Stockholm, Sweden >>> >>>>>>41. Bibbi Johansson, Stockholm,Sweden >>> >>>>>>42. Susanne Wixe, Stockholm, Sweden >>> >>>>>>43. Claes Leo Lindwall, Stockholm, Sweden >>> >>>>>>44. Lena Nilsson, Stockholm, Sweden >>> >>>>>>45. Jonas Cohen, Stockholm, Sweden >>> >>>>>>46. Bjorn Nyblom, Stockholm, Sweden >>> >>>>>>47. Per Schlingmann, Sweden >>> >>>>>>48. Jonas Palmqvist, Sweden >>> >>>>>>49. Jonas Hjelm, Sweden >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>>50. Robert Magnusson, Sweden >>> >>>>>>51. Elisabet Limmerg-rd, Lund, Sweden >>> >>>>>>52. Cecilia Widegren, Lundsbrunn, Sweden >>> >>>>>>53. Rolf K Nilsson, H+rn+sand, Sweden >>> >>>>>>54. Maria L. Ekstrand, San Francisco CA USA >>> >>>>>>55. Francis R. Abueg, Palo Alto CA USA >>> >>>>>>56. Michael Acree, San Francisco, CA, USA >>> >>>>>>57. Dori Dysland, Silver Spring, MD, USA >>> >>>>>>58. David A. Jones Portland OR. America >>> >>>>>>59. Sonja Straub, Portland, OR. USA >>> >>>>>>60. Lily Vassiliou, Portland, OR, USA >>> >>>>>>61. Stan Siver, Port Townsend, WA, USA >>> >>>>>>62. Paul McIsaac, New York, NY, USA >>> >>>>>>63. John Douglas, Charlotte, VT,USA >>> >>>>>>64. Jon Leland, Mill Valley, CA, USA >>> >>>>>>65. Peter H. Rosen, San Francisco, CA USA >>> >>>>>>66. Laura-Doe Harris, Mullumbimby, NSW Australia >>> >>>>>>67. Barbara Carrellas, New York, NY, USA >>> >>>>>>68. Chester Mainard, San Francisco, CA USA >>> >>>>>69. Keith Hennessy, San Francisco, CA USA >>> >>>>70. Dianne Monroe, Atlanta, GA USA >>> >>>>71. David Reiffel, Boston, MA USA >>> >>>>72. Mary-Ann Greanier, Plainville, MA USA >>> >>73.sam auinger,linz,austria >>> >>74. chris salter, San Francisco, CA USA >>> >>75. laura farabough >>> >>76. Morgan Jenness, New York, NY >>> >>78. Randy Gener, New York City, NY >>> >>79. Tom Robinson, London, UK >>> 80. David Holloway, Australia >>> 81. Mathias Verraes, Belgium >>> 82. Corey H Maass, NYC >>> 83. Kevin Begley, Sweden >>> 84. Vieir Henrichson Jeorge, Brasil > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 12:19:25 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: John Mark Grubb Subject: Midi help for term paper In-Reply-To: <970131112616_-1711176015@emout19.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Hi, I'm a grad studnet in Information Sciences looking for books and journal articles on the development, history, impact and future of midi. Help! John Grubb, Library Assistant ETSU/UT at Kingsport Library 1501 University Blvd. Kingsport, TN 37660-1099 Voice: (423) 392-8010 Email: johngrub@utkux.utcc.utk.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 11:18:03 -0800 Reply-To: jefff@dgii.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jeff Fried Organization: digi international Subject: Re: Sell outs, Prostitution on a note. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael Millard wrote: > I know a band here in town that won the old MTV battle of the > band. They hand a few good songs and a record contract that evolved > from the offer. The lable wanted to clean up some of the songs so they > were more clear and less obscene. They had at least two songs that were > awsome but the singer always inserted some crazy shit into the mix so he > could appear more wild and crazy. It wasn't part of the music it was > just wild garbage he piled into the mix so he seemed intense. He > refused to sing the songs the same way each time and refused to not > insert unexpected stuff into the lyrics. The lable dropped them and now > they have longed disappeared as a band. The great music they had is > never to be heard other than in memories and demo tapes. Not one member > of the band went on to do anything worth while. They don't even do > music in their homes as far as I know. A similar thing happened to my brother's band in the 70's. They had a record contract with Warner Bros., were featured on the Merv Griffin show and a centerfold in People magazine, and two of Tony Bennett's sons were in the band. They played an exiting show and wrote songs with both wit and style. However, they insisted on producing the album themselves and using friend's studios rather than what the record company suggested. Warner Bros ended up not promoting them and eventually the band died. My point is that success in any business usually involves a cooperative effort and this involves compromise. However, both Lily Tomlin and 10cc have said it more artistically: Why do you think they call it show BUSINESS instead of show ART? -- Lily Tomlin Art for Art's sake...Money for Gods-sake! -- 10 cc and I'm -- Jeff Fried. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 21:22:16 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Ways of working [ Was: Re: Re FSOL... and possibly a new flamethread] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Nope, it's JUST THE TWO OF US. That's why we have EVIL TREES. I think TREE FROM HELL was the original phrase, but I like EVIL TREES better. It sounds like the title of an Eno/Byrne album. >I start with a directory of raw >audio clips in my PC, edit them into "processed textures" or "percussive >hits" (somewhat arbitrary groupings that happen to work for me) and load >them into my sampler. I then connect as many EVIL TREE control surfaces >to realtime DSP in the sampler, for performance purposes. The problem I have with that is that I'm not very impressed with the selection of control points you get in the average sampler architecture. It's partly a fundamental issue: because the original sound is just an audio sample, there's a limit to the intimacy of realtime control you can impose (unlike, say, FM or physical modelling or wavetables (PPG-style for the soundcard-heads in the audience)). It's partly a design/marketing issue. Even though the Wavestation A/D's are sample-based with no filtering to speak of, the architecture is sophisticated, the onboard effects are good, and there are many and varied control points. No sampler comes close to this. >Also, I think I'm finding that "distancing tools" doesn't work for my >conceptual model of "effects", aside from the fact that a reverb kinda >makes it sound like the thing making sound is further away. I always >wind up thinking about them as "synthesis tools" which due to >technological constraints happen in a more blanket way than the more >fiddly functions for manipulating individual samples. Sure, so do I: I don't see a problem here. >Perhaps many are not as brave as you, feeling that a PowerBook running >MAX is just too fragile? System failures of any kind in six years of live, MAX-based performance: 5. (All pretty minor.) System failures due to pilot error (and stupid design of UltraProteus front panel interface): 1. System failures due to hardware breakdown or malfunction (Lexicon LXP-5, MOTU MIDI Time Piece): 3. System failures due to control system programming error (mine) in MAX: 1. System failures due to MAX malfunctioning or crashing, or due to PowerBook malfunctioning or crashing: 0. >PS: I found that a trick to playing the Thunder is to imagine that the >surface is about an inch below where it actually is. It helps a lot. I really must try that... 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, 3 Feb 1997 21:21:52 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >let us also not forget that we are using the bastardized american language, Speak for yourself. 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, 3 Feb 1997 15:39:10 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Brian Good Subject: Re: everything old is new again Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Mike Metlay writes: > >For an example of the truly alternative, people in the Bay Area should >keep an ear open for the Xpandathons, a series of concerts by a group >of Xpander users who go out on stage and play their Xpanders directly >from the front panel, with NO input devices at all. What comes out, >as with the stuff *I* do when I want to get really different, tends >to shock and surprise.. and not everyone wants their minds opened. >They may say they do, but true insight can be quite frightening. Precisely. It's kind of amusing, and kind of sad, that as the country sinks more and more into a morass of comfortable, I-got-mine conservatism, that the *image* of being a risk-taker is so important as a marketing device, while actual innovation is welcomed with a degree of enthusiasm usually reserved for pregnant nuns. We would be much better off if each one of us resolved to go to at least one concert a year at which our brains, or at least our preconceptions, were likely to be injured. Brian Good W: bgood@sundagger.lerc.nasa.gov H: bgood@earthlink.net ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 16:48:54 -0700 Reply-To: Matt Mauritz Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Matt Mauritz Subject: Re: The Art Discussion In-Reply-To: <970202122636_-1576856568@emout17.mail.aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII What is art? How degrading can we be with something that brings forth what may be the purest form of emotion. Art in itself does not have to be defined. We also must admit that art is very personalized. If pissing on a rock is art then so be it but to define what that means to the composer is nonsense. If using the " bastardized american language" is so limited then maybe you should teach us a thing or two, since you know everything. Iceman ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 21:22:33 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: LISTEN/MOVE Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >I'm very interested in hearing your album, Nick. Something of a generic follow-up to a few people who've inquired, with a bit of motivation which I'd be interested to have followed up. I'll probably get shouted down by the management for this, but it's not really a commercial post about the album since I'm not going to sell it... Quick intro: after a protracted period of hassle with the contemporary dance performance scene here (administrators/funders as much as choreographers and dancers) I decided to take some time out and collect together the best of the music I'd done over the last five years and put together a CD. The title is supposed to reflect two things: firstly, it's partly an album for listening to and partly for moving to. (It was going to be a double album but the Scottish Arts Council showed political disinterest in it as a fundable project.) Secondly, some of the dance material has been extended or fleshed out to make it listenable-to as well as (or even, rather than) danceable-to. Two things had pretty much put me off doing a CD at all, up until now. Firstly, it had always struck me that doing live work (especially in dance) was much more fun than working away in a little studio somewhere. Eventually, my experience of the dance scene set me straight on that score. Secondly, most people who do their own CD's seem intent on bashing away trying to publicise them in order to generate sales. This has always struck me as no fun at all, partly because of the infinitesimal chance of getting any kind of breakthrough, partly because it doesn't really address where I'm aiming artistically, which is to develop notions of process and musical imagery for dance projects. What that means career-wise is attracting the attention of the dance scene and trying to explain it to them in words of one syllable, speaking slowly and loudly. The plan, therefore, is to do a run of 1000 CD's and give them away. There's a dance mailing list run by a Dance Services Agency at The Place Theatre in London, with around 800 professional choreographers, dancers and companies signed up, across the UK, Europe and to some extent the US. Every month a big envelope arrives, with a fat newsletter and a pile of flyers for shows. Somewhere around page 10 of the newsletter will be a couple of column-inches from some musician somewhere who wants to work in dance, giving a phone number to call if anyone wants a cassette. This isn't the way for a musician to get the attention of dancers, I don't think. The only way is for them to open the newsletter over breakfast and have a CD fall into their Corn Flakes. That's the plan. The dance photo-shoot for the disc was done months ago, and I have a designer working on something for the on-disc artwork. (No jewel cases - too expensive in postage - and good on-disc artwork will be more eye-catching.) Sorry for the ramble, but people did ask. (You know who you are.) When I get my subnet router configured here I'll be back in touch with my web site and will be able to load up details of the album there. 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, 3 Feb 1997 22:41:11 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: LISTEN/MOVE -Reply Nick Rothwell writes: < I'm aiming artistically, which is to develop notions of process and musical imagery for dance projects. < I'm interested in understanding what makes a process successful in a multi-disciplinary project. For instance, does the music come first and then suggest the choreography, or the other way around? What guidlines/requirements are formulated before preparing the music? Is there evolution in the process from one project to the next? What role does improvisation play in your performances? goodluck on the CD. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 00:13:52 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: everything old is new again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brian Good wrote: > > Mike Metlay writes: > > > >For an example of the truly alternative, people in the Bay Area should > >keep an ear open for the Xpandathons, a series of concerts by a group > >of Xpander users who go out on stage and play their Xpanders directly > >from the front panel, with NO input devices at all. What comes out, > >as with the stuff *I* do when I want to get really different, tends > >to shock and surprise.. and not everyone wants their minds opened. > >They may say they do, but true insight can be quite frightening. > > Precisely. It's kind of amusing, and kind of sad, that as the country > sinks more and more into a morass of comfortable, I-got-mine > conservatism, that the *image* of being a risk-taker is so important > as a marketing device, while actual innovation is welcomed with > a degree of enthusiasm usually reserved for pregnant nuns. We would > be much better off if each one of us resolved to go to at least one > concert a year at which our brains, or at least our preconceptions, > were likely to be injured. > > Brian Good > W: bgood@sundagger.lerc.nasa.gov > H: bgood@earthlink.net Or, better yet, that we all GIVE one concert a year that challenged both ourselves and the audience in that way!! You are right on the mark, though, in that many people like to hear the music they're used to ... at least in a club or radio setting. At a concert, though, I think people are a little more prepared (with their expectations) to be receptive to something different from what they're used to. Set and Setting, as '60's pop psychology used to tout for the acidheads, work together to create the meaning of an experience! Or, as the more cynical might point out, it's all in how it's marketed!! ;) -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 00:28:21 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Midi help for term paper MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Mark Grubb wrote: > > Hi, I'm a grad studnet in Information Sciences looking for books and > journal articles on the development, history, impact and future of midi. > Help! > > John Grubb, Library Assistant > ETSU/UT at Kingsport Library > 1501 University Blvd. > Kingsport, TN 37660-1099 > Voice: (423) 392-8010 > Email: johngrub@utkux.utcc.utk.edu Try here for a start: http://www.midi.com/ click on the MUSIC button on the bottom, and then the What Is MIDI link for a pretty good article. May give you a few keywords to search for in Infosearch or elsewhere. Good Luck! -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 21:38:58 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: MJ Subject: Re: LISTEN/MOVE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'd like to hear your album too. I'd like to hear it fading off into the distance as you role on down the road OFF MY DAMN E-MAIL EVERY OTHER MESSAGE!!!!!!! Change the subject!! Do you two have nothing else better to do??? Try a personal touch....SEND YOUR CORRESPONDENCE PRIVATELY.... we don't need to view your CHAT ROOM on this discussion list. Regards MJ ---------- > From: Nick Rothwell > To: EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU > Subject: LISTEN/MOVE > Date: Monday, February 03, 1997 4:22 PM > > >I'm very interested in hearing your album, Nick. > > Something of a generic follow-up to a few people who've inquired, with a > bit of motivation which I'd be interested to have followed up. I'll > probably get shouted down by the management for this, but it's not really a > commercial post about the album since I'm not going to sell it... > > Quick intro: after a protracted period of hassle with the contemporary > dance performance scene here (administrators/funders as much as > choreographers and dancers) I decided to take some time out and collect > together the best of the music I'd done over the last five years and put > together a CD. The title is supposed to reflect two things: firstly, it's > partly an album for listening to and partly for moving to. (It was going to > be a double album but the Scottish Arts Council showed political > disinterest in it as a fundable project.) Secondly, some of the dance > material has been extended or fleshed out to make it listenable-to as well > as (or even, rather than) danceable-to. > > Two things had pretty much put me off doing a CD at all, up until now. > Firstly, it had always struck me that doing live work (especially in dance) > was much more fun than working away in a little studio somewhere. > Eventually, my experience of the dance scene set me straight on that score. > > Secondly, most people who do their own CD's seem intent on bashing away > trying to publicise them in order to generate sales. This has always struck > me as no fun at all, partly because of the infinitesimal chance of getting > any kind of breakthrough, partly because it doesn't really address where > I'm aiming artistically, which is to develop notions of process and musical > imagery for dance projects. What that means career-wise is attracting the > attention of the dance scene and trying to explain it to them in words of > one syllable, speaking slowly and loudly. > > The plan, therefore, is to do a run of 1000 CD's and give them away. > There's a dance mailing list run by a Dance Services Agency at The Place > Theatre in London, with around 800 professional choreographers, dancers and > companies signed up, across the UK, Europe and to some extent the US. Every > month a big envelope arrives, with a fat newsletter and a pile of flyers > for shows. Somewhere around page 10 of the newsletter will be a couple of > column-inches from some musician somewhere who wants to work in dance, > giving a phone number to call if anyone wants a cassette. > > This isn't the way for a musician to get the attention of dancers, I don't > think. The only way is for them to open the newsletter over breakfast and > have a CD fall into their Corn Flakes. > > That's the plan. The dance photo-shoot for the disc was done months ago, > and I have a designer working on something for the on-disc artwork. (No > jewel cases - too expensive in postage - and good on-disc artwork will be > more eye-catching.) > > Sorry for the ramble, but people did ask. (You know who you are.) When I > get my subnet router configured here I'll be back in touch with my web site > and will be able to load up details of the album there. > > Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects > http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control > > years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 00:43:08 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Corey H Maass Subject: new topic MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII a prof of mine said that without pain, there would be little or no art -im paraphrasing. this was in response to the use of 2 line rhyming couplets when ever a character spoke of grief, loss or suffering in a midsummer nite's dream by shakespeare. a lot of poetry and even much art- painting and the like- seems to act as self-therapy. it helps a person talk about a problem, experience, etc. but i dont see this so much in music. the only thing that comes to mind is that sickening ballad eric clapton did- a step down from the yardbirds and cream but i digress- do you think its cos music was made festival so early on? cos it was always entertainment, or the narrating of a tale? something else? corey ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 21:09:57 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: DEVOTION Subject: Re: Ambient music MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jon Bennett wrote: > > My current favorite is > William Orbits album Strange Cargo III, > more along ambient than house 'tho Funny, though, I recond it's the track that got me "onto" the more ambient thing. It is in the more housy side of ambient though. What should we call it then? Ambiouse? -- Over 'n out! :] DEVOTION '97 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Feb 1997 21:14:39 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: DEVOTION Subject: Re: Future Sound of London (Was : everything old is new again) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City wrote: > > FSOL stands for Future Sound Of London, a fairly clever techno duet whose > catalog has been accepted into the bosom of the community with great cries of > ecstasy. It's good stuff, but at this point it seems a bit too concerned > with its own cuttingedgeness. I recommend a spin of their first full- > length CD, _Accelerator,_ if you can find it. "Expander" is the opening > track, and one of the better examples of the techno genre I can think of. Hmmmm, if I had to point out a specific choon on that record it had to be "Papua Nuguynea". It definately was THE single of the early 90's and if there's a cutting edge to FSOL's works, it has to be that track. I, personally, still hear it once in a while, and it "works" every time! Sometimes I use it for chill out for my gym students. -- Over 'n out! :] DEVOTION '97 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 00:32:19 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Sell outs, Prostitution on a note. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jeff Fried wrote: > > Michael Millard wrote: > > I know a band here in town that won the old MTV battle of the > > band. They hand a few good songs and a record contract that evolved > > from the offer. The lable wanted to clean up some of the songs so they > > were more clear and less obscene. They had at least two songs that were > > awsome but the singer always inserted some crazy shit into the mix so he > > could appear more wild and crazy. It wasn't part of the music it was > > just wild garbage he piled into the mix so he seemed intense. He > > refused to sing the songs the same way each time and refused to not > > insert unexpected stuff into the lyrics. The lable dropped them and now > > they have longed disappeared as a band. The great music they had is > > never to be heard other than in memories and demo tapes. Not one member > > of the band went on to do anything worth while. They don't even do > > music in their homes as far as I know. > > A similar thing happened to my brother's band in the 70's. They had a > record contract with Warner Bros., were featured on the Merv Griffin > show and a centerfold in People magazine, and two of Tony Bennett's sons > were in the band. They played an exiting show and wrote songs with both > wit and style. However, they insisted on producing the album > themselves and using friend's studios rather than what the record > company suggested. Warner Bros ended up not promoting them and > eventually the band died. > > My point is that success in any business usually involves a cooperative > effort and this involves compromise. However, both Lily Tomlin and 10cc > have said it more artistically: > > Why do you think they call it show BUSINESS instead of show ART? > -- Lily Tomlin > > Art for Art's sake...Money for Gods-sake! > -- 10 cc > > and I'm > > -- Jeff Fried. EXCELLENT Jeff!! :) -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 02:47:19 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: new topic MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Corey H Maass wrote: > > a prof of mine said that without pain, there would be little or no art -im > paraphrasing. this was in response to the use of 2 line rhyming couplets > when ever a character spoke of grief, loss or suffering in a midsummer > nite's dream by shakespeare. > > a lot of poetry and even much art- painting and the like- seems to act as > self-therapy. it helps a person talk about a problem, experience, etc. > > but i dont see this so much in music. the only thing that comes to mind is > that sickening ballad eric clapton did- a step down from the yardbirds and > cream but i digress- > > do you think its cos music was made festival so early on? cos it was > always entertainment, or the narrating of a tale? something else? > > corey Corey: If that professor really said that, well, professors say a lot of things. That one just ain't so. Artists explore a lot more than pain. They explore realms un-defined as well as those defined. If you check out art history up until the late 19th century, you'd have to agree that most art was decorative, or 'illuminating' as in book and bible related embellishments, or portraiture, or photographic in still life or nature/landscape studies. Sculpture was also. MOST art through the ages has been utilitarian... that is, a way to make things actually used look prettier. All this shoots down the 'no-pain, no-art' idea pretty well. People, including professors sometimes, like to pigeonhole artists in the 'starving artist' stereotype, long-suffering souls who simply HAD to express their personal traumas through an artistic medium. But, in reality, this stereotype -- like most stereotypes -- doesn't hold water. You are correct in seeing how music evolved as an entertainment medium, as it was used in the courts of the aristocracy as background music and in the streets as often-ribald and farcical portrayals of these same aristocrats by the balladeers and traveling minstrels. All nations have their history of the development of some kind of 'blues-style' as long as there have been wars and poverty, but they've also had much more religion-related music, usually pretty chanty. Once the story-form was pulled into opera and symphony, we began to see more of the 'tragic' emotions and such appear in a big way. But, heck, look how EASILY one can create a tragic mood with music via a full symphony orchestra! People have always been rubberneckers, sure, and as such, music with suspense, drama, thrills, chills, and crisis' are a sure-draw as a crowd-pleaser. But... women like romance, now, don't they? You could just as easily construe a theory that without SEX art would not exist (see bower bird item again...) However, none of those pat ideas cover enough bases to explain why artists -- those crazy humans -- create their artwork. There are just too many fields of endeavor to cover for an easy answer to suffice. -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 02:56:48 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: LISTEN/MOVE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MJ wrote: > > I'd like to hear your album too. I'd like to hear it fading off into the > distance as you role on down the road OFF MY DAMN E-MAIL EVERY OTHER > MESSAGE!!!!!!! Change the subject!! Do you two have nothing else better > to do??? Try a personal touch....SEND YOUR CORRESPONDENCE PRIVATELY.... > we don't need to view your CHAT ROOM on this discussion list. > > Regards > > MJ > And your moniker is 'melloman' ??????? MJ Yep, there it is! How ironic! Listen, MJ... I, for one, am very interested to hear how people deal with the BUSINISS END of making this electronicmusic of our available to people. I'm not working at my art in a vacuum... there are logistics to handle every day. As Edison said, "a new invention is 1-percent inspiration and 99-percent perspiration." Our new inventions... to have any affect at all... must 'get out there.' Nick's chronicle is an interesting, and currently appropriate, one, and the method with which he is dealing with it is interesting to me and many others here. So, mello-out, dude! -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 01:26:40 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: MJ Subject: Thomas Edison and Electronic Music MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If it's so damn interesting to EVERYONE, then why is it that you and him are the only two guys talking about it?? This isn't rocket science and the Thomas Edison quote (as beautiful as it is) was a poor choice--with all due respect. I'd much rather share tips and tricks, reviews of equipment, pros and cons and other beneficial information the lot of us can benefit from than the soliloquies I'm seeing of late. Let's talk equipment, software, soundcards, samplers, synths, DATs, trends.... we're the ONLY ones that can help each other out. The manufacturers and the writers in Keyboard magazine are biased and partial. Let's accomplish something, folks. That's what this discussion list is all about. If you want to hear the guy's CD so bad...BUY IT!!!!!! ...the beige bomber is out. 'mello' but irritated, Mark Johnston ---------- > From: Terry Leigh Britton > To: EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU > Subject: Re: LISTEN/MOVE > Date: Tuesday, February 04, 1997 2:56 AM > > MJ wrote: > > > > I'd like to hear your album too. I'd like to hear it fading off into the > > distance as you role on down the road OFF MY DAMN E-MAIL EVERY OTHER > > MESSAGE!!!!!!! Change the subject!! Do you two have nothing else better > > to do??? Try a personal touch....SEND YOUR CORRESPONDENCE PRIVATELY.... > > we don't need to view your CHAT ROOM on this discussion list. > > > > Regards > > > > MJ > > > > And your moniker is 'melloman' ??????? > > MJ > > Yep, there it is! How ironic! > > Listen, MJ... I, for one, am very interested to hear how people deal > with the BUSINISS END of making this electronicmusic of our available to > people. I'm not working at my art in a vacuum... there are logistics to > handle every day. As Edison said, "a new invention is 1-percent > inspiration and 99-percent perspiration." Our new inventions... to have > any affect at all... must 'get out there.' Nick's chronicle is an > interesting, and currently appropriate, one, and the method with which > he is dealing with it is interesting to me and many others here. So, > mello-out, dude! > > -- > > Terry Leigh Britton > > http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 13:55:33 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Paulo Mouat Subject: Is Art supposed to be universal? [Re: The Art Discussion] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It would make more sense to discuss whether art is universal or otherwise something very very personal. It is a thought I read about lately, any comments? -- __|__ ___\_/___ ___ Paulo Mouat, |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt |___| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 09:17:32 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mark simon Subject: Re: new topic Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> a prof of mine said that without pain, there would be little or no art One might say rather that without comfort there would be little or no art. It's always a person's first responsibility to put food on the table and a roof over their head. Once that's accomplished a person can then think about art. That's part of what makes art a sign of a civilized society. A society that concerns itself with art is one that has successfully dealt with the problem of feeding and sheltering itself and is ready to move on to issues that go beyond mere survival. ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Mark G. Simon Music cataloger Central Tech. Services Cornell University Libraries mgs2@cornell.edu ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 09:52:49 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: Thomas Edison and Electronic Music In-Reply-To: <199702040914.BAA10686@mail-gw.pacbell.net> from "MJ" at Feb 4, 97 01:26:40 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > If it's so damn interesting to EVERYONE, then why is it that you and him > are the only two guys talking about it?? Well, everyone can't talk at once. I'm sure that for every subject that's discussed here, at least five people are totally uninterested; it's just that the intersections of the sets of uninterested people tend to be small. As far as many postings by the same people - it happens. There was a time when Mike and I were grumbled at for talking too much. What can I say? Sometimes you get interested and post a lot. Sometimes you catch up after being off for a few weeks and you reply to a number of items. Nick's approach is unique and, I think. well-suited to what he's trying to do: not *sell* them, but to get them in front of the people he wants to works with. --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 10:14:41 -0500 Reply-To: eplant@erols.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Edward Plant Subject: Re: Thomas Edison and Electronic Music MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MJ wrote: > > If it's so damn interesting to EVERYONE, then why is it that you and him > are the only two guys talking about it?? because the rest of us are too busy reading and drinking our coffee this morning to chime in. > This isn't rocket science and the > Thomas Edison quote (as beautiful as it is) was a poor choice--with all > due respect. you're right, it's not rocket science, it's music. That's what is discussed on this list - the creation (i.e. _composition_) of emusic, and the occasional divergence into how someone managed to get theirs out of the studio/basement/bedroom and into the ears of other people. I'll be watching this space closely for Nick's full report... >I'd much rather share tips and tricks, reviews of equipment, - snip - >The manufacturers and the writers in Keyboard magazine are biased and > partial. Let's accomplish something, > folks. That's what this discussion list is all about. Nope, wrong list. That's what the synth-l list is all about. Check it out. I'm sure if Joe hasn't pinged you already, he will very soon to tell you how to get there. It's very good and can be quite informative, but be careful, they don't like mean messages over there either. :) -- Edward Plant, Digital Design Engineer eplant@erols.com Stanford Telecom, AT Annapolis Junction, Maryland, USA ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 10:19:06 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Randy Meeker Subject: new topic -Reply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Professor's are entitled to their opinions, as are the rest of us. Life would be very dull and different without any quality or sensation such as pain. Without any one of them the experience that we know as life would change dramatically - Unrecognizeable to us. Sure it's fun to think about "a world without pain" but come back to common sense. Music is at it's zenith a spiritual process, perhaps catharsis is a good explanation of the pain thread of this topic, but least we delve into what is pain (ala What is Art discussion) Let it be sufficient to say Most Strong emotional states and many of the lesser ones evoke creative synergy in the composer. Occassionally even crass commercialism can be inspirational. On examining the pain thread further, Clapton's cathartic ballad about the loss of his son (despite it's commercial saturation on FM Radio) is only the tip of the Iceberg. Look at the entire genre of "The Blues" - it is laced with the pain and suffering of thousands of artists. While it may not be the pain and angst of Nine Inch Nails - Robert Johnson, BB King, Leadbelly, Paul Butterfield, Elmore James, and countless others all wail from the pain of their experience. Country Western lyrics are full of references to the human experience of pain. Opera - classic pain and suffering. But limiting this to ONLY Pain escapes the rest of the tension - tension/relief scenarios that are used in music composition. Just a thought RAM_bling.... >>> Corey H Maass 02/04/97 12:43am >>> a prof of mine said that without pain, there would be little or no art -im paraphrasing. this was in response to the use of 2 line rhyming couplets when ever a character spoke of grief, loss or suffering in a midsummer nite's dream by shakespeare. a lot of poetry and even much art- painting and the like- seems to act as self-therapy. it helps a person talk about a problem, experience, etc. but i dont see this so much in music. the only thing that comes to mind is that sickening ballad eric clapton did- a step down from the yardbirds and cream but i digress- do you think its cos music was made festival so early on? cos it was always entertainment, or the narrating of a tale? something else? corey ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:43:28 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: The post-toys phase (Re: technocomment) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Laurie Anderson held Metlay and I >(and a large audience) spellbound using a DAT deck, a M1, and a voice >processor. Well, OKAAAAAAY, I wasn't thinking of Laurie Anderson; besides, her media encompass a lot more than one keyboard. I think my point was that one can make electronic music with a small amount of gear, but just doing it with a workstation keyboard isn't (IMHO) the way to go about it; the result will be keyboard music, which is something different. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 21:15:10 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Verraes Subject: Perfect Art MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I believe that the object in creating a piece of art, is to achieve perfectness, by eliminating all things that obstruct you from creating art. Of course no-one ever achieved perfectness and no-one ever will. But I think this is not only because there is always something that obstructs you, but also because art can only exist within it's obstructions. Once a piece of art is perfect, it is no longer art. This is only a theory I recently developped, and it still needs lots of corrections (maybe it is completely wrong). Any comments are welcome. _____________________ Mathias Verraes eat.my.shorts@glo.be _____________________ ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 21:35:53 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Verraes Subject: Re: Art Discussion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert M. Sanders wrote > Verraes writes: > >> I had a similar experience. My grandfather had died and I wanted to write >> a composition for the funeral. First I made something very weird, >> experimental, but at last I wrote another one: based on Cm Bb Ab G and >> very simple melodies, which everyone liked very much. I didn't really like >> it, and first I was ashamed that I played a simple song on his funeral, but >> then I realized that, since no-one would have liked the first one, playing a >> more easy-to-understand (?) song was better for my audience and the >> situation. >> (I hope you get what I'm trying to say, because I can't put it another way) > > Thanks for sharing this profound story. By the way, what ever > happened to the first song? I'm still trying to improve it. I managed to put a lot of "feeling" into it, but some passages I can't get right. > > I think it's very hard to detach one's ego from the creative process long > enough to identify what's best for the moment and situation as opposed > to what's best for feeding one's own personal ego. > > I'll now share with you my funeral music story for what it's worth. > > My aunt "Tootsie" was a poor woman married to a butcher/baptist > preacher in Arkansas. She loved to play and sing that Mountain Opry > Gospel music. She was a very funny, good hearted soul, and I was her > favorite nephew. Well, one day she had a severe stroke that paralized > her left side and denying her the ability to play piano. It was a long > gruesome downhill slide from there. By the end, months later, when she > died, she was basically comatose. So I go to her funeral. > > The church is located out in the backwoods of Arkansas, and the upright > piano was abismally bad. The kind with broken strings and sticking keys. > The kind with the broken sustain pedal that fails to dampen the strings > and which had not held tuning in twenty or thirty years. > > They decided to bring in a better upright from somebody's home. We > hauled it through the backwoods country roads in the bed of a rickety > pickup truck that was missing it's gas tank lid. My cousin used an old rag > to stop up the gas tank. The truck was like a giant Molatoff cocktail. > > Well, I was in the truckbed with three of my cousins. While they held the > piano, I played the blues. We were going pretty fast and I remember the > wind blowing past my face, neck and arms. It was an elated experience- > Speeding through the green forests, over creeks and hills, past country > houses; the blues mixing with the changing of the gears and the > squeaking of the brakes. I remember the smiles on my cousin's faces as > we experienced this strange moment taking this borrowed piano to their > mother's funeral. > > But, the suspension in the truck wasn't quite good enough to dampen out > all of the potholes. At one point the piano suddenly shifted, faster than > we could all grab it. It toppled over making a loud banging noise, but > luckily it did not fall out of the truck. We all told Timmy to slow down. > > Once at the funeral, I didn't know what to play. I just sat their improvising > and crying and overwhelmed by grief as people walked in. We all did > music. Song after song with tears in our eyes. Stuff like "Amazing > Grace" and "I'll Fly Away Old Glory". It's what she wanted. Somehow the > quality of the piano and the acoustics of the small church and the skill > and cleverness of the musicians didn't mean a danmed thing. It was all > about sharing an experience. This is not really an art-thing. It's more like a religious experience. (I don't believe in a God but religion and God are two completely different things.) This is way beyond e-music, but it's a interesting story anyway. Maybe you should post this in a religious newsgroup ;-) > > In the end, I don't think "art" is essential. People will have meaning in their > lives without art. Religion is, indeed, one of those other meanings. > For art to have value it must, at least, not get in the > way; it must not impede people from touching the meaning in their own > individual lives. At best, it can coexist with and perhaps occasionally > enhance the lives of people. _____________________ Mathias Verraes eat.my.shorts@glo.be _____________________ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 11:33:38 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: William B Fox Subject: Re: LISTEN/MOVE In EMUSIC-L Digest - 3 Feb 1997 to 4 Feb 1997, Nick began: > Something of a generic follow-up to a few people who've inquired, with a > bit of motivation which I'd be interested to have followed up. I'll > probably get shouted down by the management for this, but it's not really a > commercial post about the album since I'm not going to sell it... It shouldn't get you in trouble since it appears to follow the guidelines, imho. You're talking about the processes and thinking that resulted in your CD. I'm on EMUSIC-L to hear such discussions. Bob Sanders: You beat me to the punch with some thoughful questions. MJ (melloman@PACBELL.NET, probably a customer of my employer): Your response seems a little out of step with your handle, i.e., not too mellow, man. You said, "SEND YOUR CORRESPONDENCE PRIVATELY." Sage advice I wish you had taken. Your response was, imo, more inflammatory than I care to see on a mailing list. Nick, if you feel that your CD is appropriate to my space music radio show, I'd like a copy for airplay. Bill BillFox@lucent.com Host of "Emusic" Thursdays at 11pm on WDIY 88.1 FM, Allentown & Bethlehem and 93.9 FM in Easton & Phillipsburg. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 08:43:34 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David John Rosborough Subject: Re: Thomas Edison and Electronic Music In-Reply-To: <199702040914.BAA10686@mail-gw.pacbell.net> from "MJ" at Feb 4, 97 01:26:40 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > If it's so damn interesting to EVERYONE, then why is it that you and him > are the only two guys talking about it?? This isn't rocket science and the > Thomas Edison quote (as beautiful as it is) was a poor choice--with all > due respect. I'd much rather share tips and tricks, reviews of equipment, > pros and cons and other beneficial information the lot of us can benefit > from than the soliloquies I'm seeing of late. Let's talk equipment, > software, soundcards, samplers, synths, DATs, trends.... we're the ONLY > ones that can help each other out. The manufacturers and the writers in > Keyboard magazine are biased and partial. Let's accomplish something, > folks. That's what this discussion list is all about. If you want to hear > the guy's CD so bad...BUY IT!!!!!! Hmmm... sounds like you've got the wrong list... if you want to talk gear, check out SYNTH-L... subscribe to it the same way you subscribed to EMUSIC-L, only change "EMUSIC-L" to "SYNTH-L" anywhere it appears in the message... If you read the FAQ (sent out faithfully every month) you'll see that EMUSIC-L is the correct place for all the conversations about people's CD's and such, and the WRONG place for equipment talk... that's SYNTH-L's domain... TTYL DaveR ________________________________________________________ Dave Rosborough Web Designer, Database junkie Apple Education Consultants Program @ SFU Sales @ SFU Microcomputer Store - 291-3098 drosboro@sfu.ca http://www.educ.sfu.ca/people/davidr/ ________________________________________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 11:55:53 -0500 Reply-To: btaylor@itos.uga.edu Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Brad Taylor Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? [Re: The Art Discussion] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Paulo Mouat wrote: > > It would make more sense to discuss whether art is universal or > otherwise something very very personal. both. -brad ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:43:57 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >> What is a Bower Bird? >http://www.dap.csiro.au:80/OPTECH/Optics-Radiometry/bower.html Was someone here sad enough to do a web search on "bower bird"? :-) Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 12:01:41 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: SINBYTE@AOL.COM Subject: Re: new topic In a message dated 97-02-04 01:03:14 EST, you write: << a prof of mine said that without pain, there would be little or no art -im paraphrasing. this was in response to the use of 2 line rhyming couplets when ever a character spoke of grief, loss or suffering in a midsummer nite's dream by shakespeare. a lot of poetry and even much art- painting and the like- seems to act as self-therapy. it helps a person talk about a problem, experience, etc. but i dont see this so much in music. the only thing that comes to mind is that sickening ballad eric clapton did- a step down from the yardbirds and cream but i digress- do you think its cos music was made festival so early on? cos it was always entertainment, or the narrating of a tale? something else? >> EVERYONE KNOWS MY TAKE ON THE SUBJECT... STIMULI ~~~~> RESPONSE SIN FURTHERING MY NEEDS... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 12:45:11 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: new topic -Reply corey writes: < a lot of poetry and even much art- painting and the like- seems to act as self-therapy. it helps a person talk about a problem, experience, etc. < I suggest listening to some symphonies and string quartet music. There's a Dmitri Shostakovich string quartet (Opus 144: String Quartet No. 15 E flat minor (1974) that's full of lamentable imagery from the brink of death, full of pain and anguish. This piece was not written for comercial appeal. Incidently, if we think it's hard to thrive in this society as artists, try it in a totalitarian regime like this guy did. Here's a complete set of recordings of his string quartet literature: Shostakovich: The complete music for String Quartet in five volumes. The Shostakovich String Quartet. (Olympia 531 - 535) $13.99 each. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 12:54:14 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Mello out, mello-boy! MJ writes: < ... as you role on down the road OFF MY DAMN E-MAIL EVERY OTHER MESSAGE!!!!!!! Change the subject!! Do you two have nothing else better to do??? Try a personal touch....SEND YOUR CORRESPONDENCE PRIVATELY.... we don't need to view your CHAT ROOM on this discussion list. < then he writes to another message: < If it's so damn interesting to EVERYONE, then why is it that you and him are the only two guys talking about it?? < ------------------------------------------------------ What's wrong with your "delete" button? Mine is working fine. I just used it ... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 12:56:57 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Bower Bird... Are they monogamous? I mean, do they mate for life? ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 13:38:25 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? [Re: The Art Discussion] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Paulo Mouat wrote: > > It would make more sense to discuss whether art is universal or > otherwise something very very personal. It is a thought I read about > lately, any comments? > -- > __|__ > ___\_/___ > ___ Paulo Mouat, > |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt > |___| I like this idea! This brings to mind immediately the idea that one may find the 'universal truths' by looking within. Well, so that's my first impression. Does that imply that the further you look into your personal depths, the more your art becomes universalized? Sounds viable as a theory, but how's it stand up in actual practice? I myself seem to have the experience that the further out of my ego-self I get and the more absorbed I become in the act of creating itself (which forces me into the present-tense almost in lock-step), the better I like the result. This most definitely does NOT lead to it being liked by everybody else... so maybe we need to narrow the definition of 'universal' (as contradictory as that sounds!): Universal in acceptance or universal in some very-esoteric way? -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 13:14:36 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Michael V. Briggs" Organization: Syzygy Studios Subject: Re: Thomas Edison and Electronic Music MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mark Johnston wrote > I'd much rather share tips and tricks, reviews of equipment, > pros and cons and other beneficial information the lot of us can benefit > from than the soliloquies I'm seeing of late. Let's talk equipment, > software, soundcards, samplers, synths, DATs, trends.... I'm surprised Joe didn't point this out, but if you're looking for gearhead talk, you're on the wrong list. SYNTH-L is for gearheads. EMUSIC-L is for discussions of composing & performance technique, ongoing projects (i.e., CDs), and generally more philosophical topics. You might try reading the email you received when you sign on to EMUSIC-L... On a general note, while I may or may not be interested in discussing Nick's CD, I am definitely NOT interested in reading someone else complain about it. If you don't want to read about it, delete the msg. If you think there is too much crap on the list, you can either post something meaningful (and on-topic), thereby increasing the signal/noise ratio, or you can sign off. Still here after four years, Michael Briggs mbriggs@ix.netcom.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 14:21:21 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Perfect Art MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Verraes wrote: > > I believe that the object in creating a piece of art, is to achieve > perfectness, by eliminating all things that obstruct you from creating art. All things such as what? Media? (paint, canvas, synth, DAT, or dead batteries?) > Of course no-one ever achieved perfectness and no-one ever will. But I > think this is not only because there is always something that obstructs > you, but also because art can only exist within it's obstructions. I know you have a set of obstructions defined that lends validity and great import to that statement. Please let us know what obstructions you refer to. Once a > piece of art is perfect, it is no longer art. What is it then? A god? (heh)... > > This is only a theory I recently developped, and it still needs lots of > corrections (maybe it is completely wrong). Any comments are welcome. > Comment: Don't stop. With this theory more fully developed, we may see more clearer the whole picture. > _____________________ > > Mathias Verraes > eat.my.shorts@glo.be > _____________________ -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:12:17 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Nick Rothwell wrote: > > >> What is a Bower Bird? > > >http://www.dap.csiro.au:80/OPTECH/Optics-Radiometry/bower.html > > Was someone here sad enough to do a web search on "bower bird"? :-) > > Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects > http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control > > years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again heh-heh... yes, and Nno-one refers to me as a compulsive-obsessive! (yet)... I found it an entertaining metaphor, I did! -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 15:13:40 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: new topic MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SINBYTE@AOL.COM wrote: > > In a message dated 97-02-04 01:03:14 EST, you write: > > << a prof of mine said that without pain, there would be little or no art -im > paraphrasing. this was in response to the use of 2 line rhyming couplets > when ever a character spoke of grief, loss or suffering in a midsummer > nite's dream by shakespeare. > > a lot of poetry and even much art- painting and the like- seems to act as > self-therapy. it helps a person talk about a problem, experience, etc. > > but i dont see this so much in music. the only thing that comes to mind is > that sickening ballad eric clapton did- a step down from the yardbirds and > cream but i digress- > > do you think its cos music was made festival so early on? cos it was > always entertainment, or the narrating of a tale? something else? > >> > EVERYONE KNOWS MY TAKE ON THE SUBJECT... > > STIMULI ~~~~> RESPONSE > > SIN FURTHERING MY NEEDS... Please elaborate. -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 07:20:07 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: LISTEN/MOVE MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT MJ's response to Nick's message was uncalled for. Nick, I think, has too much to do to send mail at a whim. He generally replies to mail which interests him. In the case of recent posts, many people had _asked_ him. What would _you_ have done, Melloman? > we don't need to view your CHAT ROOM on this discussion list. The last time I looked, it didn't seem to me that one member of the list could dictate to others what was allowable on the list. Leave it to Joe and Mike, whose guidance is post-moderated (i.e. after the fact) and certainly more friendly. > Regards > > MJ On the contrary. You seem to have no regard. Civility is a virtue here. David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au http://farben.latrobe.edu.au/d_rodger/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 12:30:42 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marshall Otwell Subject: Re: LISTEN/MOVE > From: MJ > Subject: Re: LISTEN/MOVE > To: EMUSIC-L@AMERICAN.EDU > > I'd like to hear your album too. I'd like to hear it fading off into the > distance as you role on down the road OFF MY DAMN E-MAIL EVERY OTHER > MESSAGE!!!!!!! Change the subject!! Do you two have nothing else better > to do??? Try a personal touch....SEND YOUR CORRESPONDENCE PRIVATELY.... > we don't need to view your CHAT ROOM on this discussion list. > > Regards > > MJ hmmm, methinks Mr. Melloman doth give the lie to his charming moniker :-) (hee, hee) ... and I like it! (in the words of Bonnie Raitt) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 16:46:54 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Bower Bird... MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert M. Sanders wrote: > > Are they monogamous? > I mean, do they mate for life? NOW we're getting off topic!!! :) -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 17:00:48 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Ego: the training wheel of creativity Terry Britton writes: < I myself seem to have the experience that the further out of my ego-self I get and the more absorbed I become in the act of creating itself (which forces me into the present-tense almost in lock-step), the better I like the result. < I think creative evolution is a recurring cycle characterized by an initial stage of ego driven growth (linear) followed by a secondary stage of post-ego, or non ego-inhibited growth (geometric). After a period of non ego-inhibited growth (let's face it) a plateau is reached. Although the ego has been successfully removed from the creative process, the universe of possibilities is finite. It takes new ego driven, will-oriented action to absorb and infuse the new concepts, tools and techniques which, once mastered, can be unleashed in the next post-ego phase thereby expanding the universe of possibilities. The trick is when to turn on and off the ego. Buying gear generally requires the invocation of the more frustrating linear ego-oriented mode in order to master the interface sufficiently to "play" with it later. A "good" piece of gear will be easily absorbed minimizing the initial phase, but provide virtually unlimited possibilities to explore during the latter phase. The decision to acquire the piece of gear will consider how big you expect your "universe" to expand if you commit yourself to he "hassle" of learning to use it, in addition to cost and other considerations. If "I have to have it" then I'm saying that I've reached the plateau with the existing gear. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 17:19:07 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Re: Perfect Art -Reply Vereas and Britton wrote: < I believe that the object in creating a piece of art, is to achieve perfectness, by eliminating all things that obstruct you from creating art. All things such as what? Media? (paint, canvas, synth, DAT, or dead batteries?) > I think the "obstruction" is the intrusion of self awareness partially distancing and distracting the audience (including the creater) Extending Sinbyte's model, (STIMULUS ~~~~~> RESPONSE): if in the mind of the audience there are more STIMULI than just the one(s) you as composer/performer/artist are providing, you have reduced influence on the RESPONSE. As a seasoned audience member, I remember the following STIMULI competing with the "entertainment" * stomach sensations * attractive members of the opposite sex, both in the audience and on stage * any petty arguments over dinner * the smells of the place * how to slip out that "silent wind" without anybody noticing or knowing I did it * loud talking * coughing * room temperature * where to put my coat, or my wife's coat (inevitably on my lap) * my pre-existing impression of the performers, etc. * preoccupation with thoughts like, "did I turn off the headlights?" ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 19:42:34 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Ego: the training wheel of creativity MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert M. Sanders wrote: > > Terry Britton writes: > < > I myself seem to have the experience that the further out of my ego-self > I get and the more absorbed I become in the act of creating itself > (which forces me into the present-tense almost in lock-step), the better > I like the result. > < > > I think creative evolution is a recurring cycle characterized by > an initial stage of ego driven growth (linear) followed by > a secondary stage of post-ego, or non ego-inhibited growth (geometric). > > After a period of non ego-inhibited growth (let's face it) a plateau is > reached. Although the ego has been successfully removed from the > creative process, the universe of possibilities is finite. > > It takes new ego driven, will-oriented action to absorb and infuse the > new concepts, tools and techniques which, once mastered, can be > unleashed in the next post-ego phase thereby expanding the universe of > possibilities. > > The trick is when to turn on and off the ego. > This is really good stuff, you know. In just a few short paragraphs, you have made a statement that could be turned into a best-seller in the pop-psychology market! (I'm not kidding!) If I knew how to forward this to Shirley McLain, I bet it could make you millions! (ok, kidding now...) :) But seriously, you have hit the nail on the head. I've never seen this expressed better or more succinctly. > Buying gear generally requires the invocation of the more frustrating > linear ego-oriented mode in order to master the interface sufficiently to > "play" with it later. > If you refer to linear ego-oriented mode as similar to the stuff we go through when learning how to drive a car, compared to how easily we manage all those details after driving for a while, then: you ain't kidding! > A "good" piece of gear will be easily absorbed minimizing the initial > phase, but provide virtually unlimited possibilities to explore during the > latter phase. Well, I don't know about virtually unlimited, but 'different' possibilities, yes. That is, lots of room for exploration and discovery. > > The decision to acquire the piece of gear will consider how big you > expect your "universe" to expand if you commit yourself to he "hassle" > of learning to use it, in addition to cost and other considerations. Or the decision to read the manual... > > If "I have to have it" then I'm saying that I've reached the plateau with the > existing gear. Usually, I 'have to have it' if I can imagine possibilities that excite me soon after exposure to a unit's sound or interface. So, sometimes I am still advancing with the existing equipment, but now am all worked up about using these new sounds or interfaces. One of the most important lessons that the techno (and other pop/dance medium) artists have taught me (careful, I'm saying something very flattering about techno now) is that *my* plateau is just another person's starting point. When I think of how AWFUL we thought those 'vintage synths' sounded twenty years ago, and then compare what we did with the really cool new sounds and uses for those sounds that the techno-folks consistently deliver, I get humble... but also realize that any machine I own probably deserves a second look from a fresh viewpoint. 'That ego-thang' does often get in the way of engendering that fresh look we're after, but once dispensed with, necessarily spawns a fresh 'ego-thang' to replace the old. So, I love your suggestion that 'The trick is when to turn on and off the ego.' There is truly priceless economy therein! -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 21:34:22 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jacky Schreiber Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? [Re: The Art Discussion] >Paulo Mouat wrote: >> >> It would make more sense to discuss whether art is universal or >> otherwise something very very personal. > >both. > > > > >-brad -------------------------------------------------------------_____________________________________ Maybe even more than that! Jacky Schreiber-------->jackysch@ven.net http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/1094 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 21:30:56 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jacky Schreiber Subject: Re: Perfect Art >I believe that the object in creating a piece of art, is to achieve >perfectness, by eliminating all things that obstruct you from creating art. >Of course no-one ever achieved perfectness and no-one ever will. But I >think this is not only because there is always something that obstructs >you, but also because art can only exist within it's obstructions. Once a >piece of art is perfect, it is no longer art. > >This is only a theory I recently developped, and it still needs lots of >corrections (maybe it is completely wrong). Any comments are welcome. > >_____________________ > > Mathias Verraes > eat.my.shorts@glo.be >_____________________ > -------------------------------------------------------------------____________________________________ This sounds like to me like a Woody Allen manifesto (imho)................................. Jacky Schreiber-------->jackysch@ven.net http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/1094 begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT M>)\^(AX!`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$-@ 0` M`@````(``@`!!) &`#@!```!````# ````,``# #````"P`/#@`````"`?\/ M`0```%0`````````@2L?I+ZC$!F=;@#=`0]4`@````!%;&5C=')O;FEC($UU M``(P`0````4```!33510`````!X``S !````%@```$5-55-)0RU,0$%- M15))0T%.+D5$50````,`%0P!`````P#^#P8````>``$P`0```",````G16QE M8W1R;VYI8R!-=7-I8R!$:7-C=7-S:6]N($QI`#@``@!'`0$@@ ,`#@```,T'`@`$`!4`'0`/``(`'0$!"8 !`"$` M``!&,D(Q1#8U-$0S-T5$,#$Q.4,Y030T-#4U,S4T,# P, #O!@$#D 8`\ 0` M`!(````+`",```````,`)@``````"P`I```````#`#8``````$ `.0# `1D\ M!!.\`1X`< `!````$ ```%)%.B!097)F96-T($%R= `"`7$``0```!8````! MO!,$/ A4UK'S?M,1T)R:1$535 `````>`!X,`0````4```!33510`````!X` M'PP!````$0```&IA8VMY0,``"T( M``!,6D9UKS)NK/\`"@$/`A4"J 7K`H,`4 +R"0(`8V@*P'-E=#(W!@`&PP*# M,@/%`@!P)S=&5M`H,S=P+D!Q,"@'T*@ C/"=D[\18/,C4U`H *@0VQ M"V! ;F0<]$CH&)Y(""1;0N (F7^; ,@(0`B@2/1(1(A MD!/ U')U'&%Y"& @`U(B*=T`("XDGR6O'VY/(U %H,,(J(K!N,5"',"H#\"F +B!"=2!![RQO+7\?;BFR:RFB!" CP3,P M("I1;FPHD"" 8V$^=2_Q(5$6$".R!T!W87D3L"!S`W 1P"G"*AQS_S/O-/\? M;BL!*&$SH0= .?"?.&U(Z%&\_TP(" 5H!D0,+(L/T0/11_O''E) MKTJ_'"54-W4X(R+ _R%1!; HD"!@%A C$ (P.$'7#; @T!6@<">P9".@,C+? M1]$3P#-!,! )X&0$(!6@_SM0(S%,/TU/'VX%H5#10E-T("@`P'D@@$?%!:!M M;PM0$< @D"B0=P-@&1 I^3-P06XHD%AQ!X ",#(1[3DA=R"06'%E20]4SU7? M]UL_7$\?;E]A?V&Q7E]?;]]=7V+?8^\??6CU32$@)$#*800@5@20D][37)?;WU?0(_$H!W!N,%EP@J^#K:L*A0J%2@#0:RB04Q%PE180 M:2" `' ` end ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 21:29:10 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jacky Schreiber Subject: Re: The post-toys phase (Re: technocomment) >>Laurie Anderson held Metlay and I >>(and a large audience) spellbound using a DAT deck, a M1, and a voice >>processor. > >Well, OKAAAAAAY, I wasn't thinking of Laurie Anderson; besides, her media >encompass a lot more than one keyboard. I think my point was that one can >make electronic music with a small amount of gear, but just doing it with a >workstation keyboard isn't (IMHO) the way to go about it; the result will >be keyboard music, which is something different. > > Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects > http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control > > years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again --------------------------------------------------------------_______________________________________ Oh yes!, another sub-category, now we can open a discussion on samplermusic, keyboardmusic, modulemusic, wavestationmusic, maxmusic, keykitmusic and the like... yours Jacky Schreiber-------->jackysch@ven.net http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/1094 begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT M>)\^(A4!`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$-@ 0` M`@````(``@`!!) &`#@!```!````# ````,``# #````"P`/#@`````"`?\/ M`0```%0`````````@2L?I+ZC$!F=;@#=`0]4`@````!%;&5C=')O;FEC($UU M``(P`0````4```!33510`````!X``S !````%@```$5-55-)0RU,0$%- M15))0T%.+D5$50````,`%0P!`````P#^#P8````>``$P`0```",````G16QE M8W1R;VYI8R!-=7-I8R!$:7-C=7-S:6]N($QI7,@<&AA`' ``0```"P```!2 M13H@5&AE('!O]^TQ'0G)I$15-4`````!X`'@P!````!0`` M`%--5% `````'@`?# $````1````:F%C:WES8VA =F5N+FYE= `````#``80 MMEWA40,`!Q *`P``'@`($ $```!E````3$%54DE%04Y$15)33TY(14Q$3454 M3$%904Y$22A!3D1!3$%21T5!541)14Y#12E34$5,3$)/54Y$55-)3D=!1$%4 M1$5#2RQ!33$L04Y$059/24-%4%)/0T534T]25T5,3"Q/2P`````"`0D0`0`` M`.\#``#K`P``/ @``$Q:1G6*$+G>_P`*`0\"%0*H!>L"@P!0`O()`@!C: K M2 `<"&@22\*AQW?'N\?]B@B,F$@60M@ M)J!A,/\R#RPN)L'_`W *L 01)@$<,#A !; @P(\UL .1`B @P&ME>0;@O0L1 M+C41-;,X0"(0<"G WP(P-3(]`@5 /6)C`' XK]\YORPN`, ]H#NP;!Q1`V#] M`P!C.$ GT410`_ UL"7Q_G,`P"=0(B $8">0/\$V4*]5_U0(P(7#_`) \02)!7J(#8$_/85]B;^]GGVBO8G]MRGE&43?A/!*))_)B M>2C05D-/;[)Z1BDU9PMQ<%EJOVO'+>]S7W1O=7]V*%]W/WA/>)+-"H5/10!N MH',A*3)=(?,X(4] 8BU (!/03A!?0/\HT'JP!^!=4$ 2-C G, .@?R8`)J $ M\"?0`) A02%!<_]%H M0!)!3M J%/:93M01AYT]0$^!3Q6%V!Y!+E'_&W&%X M4[4]H37P=$1T(C)W36(9T#V@+H1 "H4*A7E7"&%@1@J%2@#0:R(04RL1 From: Krikawa Subject: Re: The post-toys phase (Re: technocomment) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit nick sez: > >Well, OKAAAAAAY, I wasn't thinking of Laurie Anderson; besides, her media > >encompass a lot more than one keyboard. I think my point was that one can > >make electronic music with a small amount of gear, but just doing it with a > >workstation keyboard isn't (IMHO) the way to go about it; the result will > >be keyboard music, which is something different. jacky sez: > Oh yes!, another sub-category, now we can open a discussion on samplermusic, > keyboardmusic, modulemusic, wavestationmusic, maxmusic, keykitmusic and the like... I suppose & that would be fine, but I'm not sure I get your point, Jacky. What's up? -John Krikawa krikawa@theriver.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 04:45:59 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Paulo Mouat Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > This brings to mind immediately the idea that one may find the > 'universal truths' by looking within. Well, so that's my first > impression. Does that imply that the further you look into your > personal depths, the more your art becomes universalized? > > Sounds viable as a theory, but how's it stand up in actual practice? > > I myself seem to have the experience that the further out of my > ego-self I get and the more absorbed I become in the act of creating > itself (which forces me into the present-tense almost in lock-step), > the better I like the result. This most definitely does NOT lead to it > being liked by everybody else... so maybe we need to narrow the > definition of 'universal' (as contradictory as that sounds!): > Universal in acceptance or universal in some very-esoteric way? I would like to quote from Xenakis, once again: "Music is not a language. Every piece is like a rugged rock, with countless grooves and carved with drawings on the surface and beneath, which people decipher and interpret in a thousand different ways, none of them being the best nor the truest." This quote made me definitely give up on that generally accepted idea that music is for everyone or, should I say, that a piece of music should be composed with consensus in mind, meaning everyone should gather a similar understanding from hearing it. I take from this that the appreciation of a piece of Art is a very personal affair, and despite the evidence that some Art seems really to be universal, it always rests upon your own brain to perform the task of assimilating it. Since we cannot extrapolate a general law simply from common phenomena, the only way to prove the universality of a certain kind of Art or any of its specific renditions would be by taking the intersection of all appreciated art forms and creations and obtaining it in the resulting set. It is clear that most likely the resulting set is empty, i.e. there is no single art form or work universally appreciated. As a composer, this all brings an interesting concept: A work of art, in this case, a music piece, ceases to be the expression of a very definite idea--idea that was to be desirably consensual between audience and composer--to be like that piece of rock, infinitely reinterpreted and thus with different facets for each member of the audience. In a sense, Art is universal since it has the means to reach everyone, albeit with a different aspect from one person to the next. On another sense, it is not, since it is an altogether different thing for different people. Either way, the idea of an 'universal truth' seems cast aside. Best! -- __|__ ___\_/___ ___ Paulo Mouat, |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt |___| ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 21:36:08 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Richard Lahrson Subject: Re: Ego: the training wheel of creativity MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Too much gear can be a bad thing. KISS (keep it simple stupid) is the way. I play amped alto flute, Moog Prodigy both through a Zoom 9002 (small, light, AC\DC, two delays and +\- one octave pitch shift). I've added a Soundblaster 16 with the first Waveblaster daughterboard to the PC. I've ordered the MIDI adapter cable from Soundblaster in Sweetwater, OK. Incredibly the MIDI adapter has been discontinued but is still stock. I need a MIDI controller. Big decision. I can't decide. Wind controller? Keyboard? Theremin? Buchla Thunder? Buchla LIghtning? Convert the Moog Prodigy to MIDI? I'd like some feedback to the list on the subject of what type of controllers folks are using and like, the pluses and minuses of MIDI controller choice. Rich tripspud@hooked.net. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 01:50:22 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Ego: the training wheel of creativity MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Richard Lahrson wrote: > > Too much gear can be a bad thing. KISS (keep it simple stupid) is > the way. I play amped alto flute, Moog Prodigy both through a Zoom 9002 > (small, light, AC\DC, two delays and +\- one octave pitch shift). > I've added a Soundblaster 16 with the first Waveblaster > daughterboard to the PC. I've ordered the MIDI adapter cable from > Soundblaster in Sweetwater, OK. Incredibly the MIDI adapter has been > discontinued but is still stock. I need a MIDI controller. Big decision. > I can't decide. Wind controller? Keyboard? Theremin? Buchla Thunder? > Buchla LIghtning? Convert the Moog Prodigy to MIDI? > I'd like some feedback to the list on the subject of what type of > controllers folks are using and like, the pluses and minuses of MIDI > controller choice. > Rich tripspud@hooked.net. Well, I'm such an incredible keyboard player, that I am seriously biased to keyboard controllers. (Gee, I'd be perfect if I didn't have such a problem with modesty...) I'm also an electric-flute player (I don't flaunt flautist), and I had a heck of a lot of fun with that real-cheap Casio saxophone controller that still sells in the back of Keyboard and Electronic Musician. Sure, plastic... but fun, easy, portable (also has its own sounds.. someone will use it for proto-techno in ten years!) Or you can spring for a Lyricon. What is the Thunder, you thunderers out there? A drum-skin? MIDI Theremin is only for the gifted and the rich. But so are really high-end keyboard-controllers, and the Theremin is cheaper. People will think you are cool with a Theremin, but make sure the lightening-rod in your mouth is playing with a very well grounded antennae set. You will look silly onstage being electrocuted (as one of my students actually WAS -- by lightening, yet!) Decisions, decisions... Frankly, if you can make waving a flute at a Theremin look good onstage, you should be selling used cars, because you can make ANYTHING look good. -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 02:00:01 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Paulo Mouat wrote: > > > This brings to mind immediately the idea that one may find the > > 'universal truths' by looking within. Well, so that's my first > > impression. Does that imply that the further you look into your > > personal depths, the more your art becomes universalized? > > > > Sounds viable as a theory, but how's it stand up in actual practice? > > > > I myself seem to have the experience that the further out of my > > ego-self I get and the more absorbed I become in the act of creating > > itself (which forces me into the present-tense almost in lock-step), > > the better I like the result. This most definitely does NOT lead to it > > being liked by everybody else... so maybe we need to narrow the > > definition of 'universal' (as contradictory as that sounds!): > > Universal in acceptance or universal in some very-esoteric way? > > I would like to quote from Xenakis, once again: > "Music is not a language. Every piece is like a rugged rock, with > countless grooves and carved with drawings on the surface and beneath, > which people decipher and interpret in a thousand different ways, none > of them being the best nor the truest." > > This quote made me definitely give up on that generally accepted idea > that music is for everyone or, should I say, that a piece of music > should be composed with consensus in mind, meaning everyone should > gather a similar understanding from hearing it. > > I take from this that the appreciation of a piece of Art is a very > personal affair, and despite the evidence that some Art seems really to > be universal, it always rests upon your own brain to perform the task of > assimilating it. > > Since we cannot extrapolate a general law simply from common phenomena, > the only way to prove the universality of a certain kind of Art or any > of its specific renditions would be by taking the intersection of all > appreciated art forms and creations and obtaining it in the resulting > set. It is clear that most likely the resulting set is empty, i.e. > there is no single art form or work universally appreciated. > > As a composer, this all brings an interesting concept: A work of art, > in this case, a music piece, ceases to be the expression of a very > definite idea--idea that was to be desirably consensual between audience > and composer--to be like that piece of rock, infinitely reinterpreted > and thus with different facets for each member of the audience. > > In a sense, Art is universal since it has the means to reach everyone, > albeit with a different aspect from one person to the next. On another > sense, it is not, since it is an altogether different thing for > different people. Either way, the idea of an 'universal truth' seems > cast aside. > > Best! > -- > __|__ > ___\_/___ > ___ Paulo Mouat, > |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt > |___| I can't help but bring up this cross-cultural impression: Humans are aware of two basic language tools: harmony and dissonance. Harmony (as that is determined by a particular culture, but pretty much meaning the same thing across cultures) refers to... things harmonious... uh... well... niceness. Dissonance refers to difficulty, tension, and not-so-niceness. The two are constantly interplayed, like light and darkness, and woven into our musical language, impressing it with at least THAT amount of meaning. So, as much as I like Xanakis, he missed the smooth vs. the rough sections of his rock. People intrepret smooth things as smooth and rough things as rough. In music, the interplay in time becomes laced with meaning. The details of interpretation may differ, but we'll both see 'happy' if 'happy' is being musiked at us. So, can we dismiss this universality altogether? -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 00:34:52 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: MJ Subject: Re: Mello out, mello-boy! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ok gents... I'll leave the list, no problemo. But let me leave you all with this thought: If you nuerotic, psycho-analysis-ridden, introverted e-mail monkeys spent HALF the time on your musical keyboard as you did on your computer keyboard, I probably would have never had to send my "flaming" (as one monkey put it) message in the first place. Regards, MJ "the world's a piano...I'm just another playa." ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 20:47:58 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: peter mc phail Subject: unsubscribe Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Please unsubsribe,thank you. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 09:00:29 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Oh, Oh, I'm gonna quit MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii MJ wrote: > > Ok gents... I'll leave the list, no problemo. But let me leave you all > with this thought: > > If you nuerotic, psycho-analysis-ridden, introverted e-mail monkeys spent > HALF the time on your musical keyboard as you did on your computer > keyboard, I probably would have never had to send my "flaming" (as one > monkey put it) message in the first place. > > Regards, > > MJ > > "the world's a piano...I'm just another playa." Why does the opinion of a few list readers cause you to leave the list so easily. I get so fed up with these ok so I'll leave the list messages I could scream. Do we just attract a bunch of _ _ _ sys or what? If I didn't like your music would you quit making it? The point we have all made is that you crossed a line of social acceptance. You now know where the line is and what happens when you cross it. This list comprises some truly cool people. I am a very busy person and I look forward to reading what Mike, Joe, Bill, Nick, Courtney, Terry and many others have to say. I value their opinion and I am willing to hear what they have to say. What many of us were saying is that we can tolerate a certain amount of uninteresting mail because the good stuff is worth it. Synth-L is a great list, I think most of the people on this list are on it too. I don't care if you leave or not, or anyone else really if you don't have what it takes to stay. I almost never contribute cause these guys are over my head, but I try. I listen and I learn. If I quit because someone flamed me I'd have left after my first 30 encounters with Mike. ( sure seemed that way then. ) Nearly four years latter I'm still here. If your gonna quit then quit but I don't want to hear about it. Loosers and quiters and overly sensitive mellon heads were not why I joined the list or why I've stayed on the list. I'm here for the musical contacts, inspiration, companionship from very cool people, and to hear what very nice work others are doing. I'd like to think I can sometimes be helpful too. If you or anyone else cann't take the rules of social order on the page leave, its to your loss. If you got what it takes then stay. I once flamed Courtney for being a Dick and found out in the process that he was a majorly cool person who was particular pissed about a topic that was going around. He got flamed by a number of people and he stayed cause he has balls and an interest in his music. ( forgive my phrasing. ) I read every post to this list and I get something out of less than that. I have a delete key. Toughen up Mello Man. I'd like to see what you have to offer. Maybe I'll see you on Synth-L, but while its a different list with different topics It's not a kinder and gentler bunch. I hear people even get flamed on the pottery list. See ya ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 11:20:48 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: George Henry Subject: Re: Perfect Art Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 09:15 PM 2/2/97 +0100, you wrote: >I believe that the object in creating a piece of art, is to achieve >perfectness, by eliminating all things that obstruct you from creating art. >Of course no-one ever achieved perfectness and no-one ever will. But I >think this is not only because there is always something that obstructs >you, but also because art can only exist within it's obstructions. Once a >piece of art is perfect, it is no longer art. > >This is only a theory I recently developped, and it still needs lots of >corrections (maybe it is completely wrong). Any comments are welcome. > >_____________________ > > Mathias Verraes > eat.my.shorts@glo.be >_____________________ > [DISCLAIMER:] Not wishing to become embroiled in philosophical debate, My personal concept is that art is an elaborated representation of the artist's perception of some aspect of human experience. I find that often I can enjoy the manner of elaboration and presentation, even if I don't agree with (or don't understand) what the artist is trying to convey. Yes, art may be an effort to idealize something, but mathematical idealizations, such as a plane or a circle, are not art. If an artist paints a circle on a plane of canvas, it may be art. I would tend to perceive such a painting with a completely different set of sensitivities, or sensibilities, than a very similar illustration in a math textbook. So I think the creator's intent is an important factor. Was he trying to produce an "elaborate representation ..." (my definition given above)? Then I will be inclined to cooperate with him by trying to perceive his product as such. George Henry Bandana Computer Synergizing Business, Arts, and Technology for the 21st Century http://www.bandanacomputer.com/ "Our goal is to consistently surpass your expectations." ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 12:03:42 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: Mello out, mello-boy! In-Reply-To: <199702050822.AAA18268@mail-gw.pacbell.net> from "MJ" at Feb 5, 97 00:34:52 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Ok gents... I'll leave the list, no problemo. But let me leave you all > with this thought: > You misunderstand (I hope you're still here). The idea is to get you to talk about what you WANT to talk about, rather than saying "I don't want to talk about that." That's all. --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 13:34:37 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Light Being #1 Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? my belief is that there is further life outside of our solar system, possibly in our solar system, and beyond our spectrem, our dimension. that in it-self does include music as an art form, rather a feeling.mabye there is such life out there that is constructed of pure feeling, pure light.we, as a world must not single things out, even though it is fun to theorize and decipher diiferent aspects once and a while, for some all the time.we have to keep every door and window open.it is not a bad thing to build a concrete wall around something and guard it with your life, your jelous imagination, but be sensible! music is a mystery, and in my case doesn't need to be explained, nor disected.it is purely a feel for me, you know one of those things you get when falling in love or watching someone get killed. music is a very diverse entity.it feeds off of human instinct and human flaw.it cannot be killed.it can not be restrained.it always finds its way around to the perfect situation at the perfect time.mabye music is our creator and we are its servants? all i know is its here, universal or not.universal is such a childish thing, because it portrays a tedious want of a person.like lust or gluttony.we want it to be universal, we want others to like our music,be it alien or japanese. we are universal. * ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 11:07:59 -0800 Reply-To: jefff@dgii.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jeff Fried Organization: digi international Subject: Re: Mello out, mello-boy! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MJ wrote: > > Ok gents... I'll leave the list, no problemo. But let me leave you all > with this thought: > > If you nuerotic, psycho-analysis-ridden, introverted e-mail monkeys spent > HALF the time on your musical keyboard as you did on your computer > keyboard, I probably would have never had to send my "flaming" (as one > monkey put it) message in the first place. > > Regards, > > MJ > > "the world's a piano...I'm just another playa." Gee, I'd love to spend more time on my musical keyboards, but my boss says if I don't spend my days typing on my computer keyboard I'll be out on the street and will have to sell my gear to feed my family. -- Jeff. Disclaimer: my boss is actually a pretty good guy. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 10:59:55 -0800 Reply-To: jefff@dgii.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jeff Fried Organization: digi international Subject: Re: new topic -Reply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Randy Meeker wrote: > > Professor's are entitled to their opinions, as are the rest of us. > > Life would be very dull and different without any quality or sensation such > as pain. Without any one of them the experience that we know as life would > change dramatically - Unrecognizeable to us. Sure it's fun to think about > "a world without pain" but come back to common sense. Music is at it's > zenith a spiritual process, perhaps catharsis is a good explanation of the > pain thread of this topic, but least we delve into what is pain (ala What > is Art discussion) Let it be sufficient to say Most Strong emotional states > and many of the lesser ones evoke creative synergy in the composer. > Occassionally even crass commercialism can be inspirational. > Actually, its quite likely that life would be impossible without pain. Think about the simple avoidance/attraction mechanisms of a single cell organism: move away from noxious substances or predators, move towards light or food. This is probably basis of emotion. -- Jeff. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 21:09:57 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Verraes Subject: Re: The Art Discussion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Matt Mauritz wrote : > What is art? How degrading can we be with something that brings forth > what may be the purest form of emotion. Art in itself does not have to > be defined. We also must admit that art is very personalized. If pissing > on a rock is art then so be it but to define what that means to the > composer is nonsense. We probably all agree that art is something very valuable and special, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to define it, even though we know we will never succeed. People who believe in God also think he(she) is something very special, but they also try to define it. _________________________ Mathias Verraes eat.my.shorts@glo.be 'Aequalitas haud parit bellum' _________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 19:14:29 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Paulo Mouat Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I can't help but bring up this cross-cultural impression: Humans are > aware of two basic language tools: harmony and dissonance. Harmony (as > that is determined by a particular culture, but pretty much meaning > the same thing across cultures) refers to... things harmonious... > uh... well... niceness. I think Niceness does not necessarily mean Harmony. The sounds of a flowing stream may be quite nice in the background of a music piece. They're far from being harmonious. > Dissonance refers to difficulty, tension, and not-so-niceness. There is some quite nice serial music, where tonal harmonic relations are pretty much avoided. Niceness can be expressed by dissonance. Moreover, consonance can be very much unpleasant in such a scenario. And not to speak of certain pieces where the question of consonance/ dissonance isn't applicable, at least in the usual sense of the words. > So, as much as I like Xanakis, he missed the smooth vs. the rough > sections of his rock. People intrepret smooth things as smooth and > rough things as rough. That's beside the point. The idea is that people have different ways of looking at things, and will focus only on a subset of details. > In music, the interplay in time becomes laced with meaning. The > details of interpretation may differ, but we'll both see 'happy' if > 'happy' is being musiked at us. Except that a composer's idea of 'happy' may not succeed in being understood as 'happy.' Naivete or plain obviousness come to mind. Our own perception may adapt better to certain composers, but as I said, it would be erroneous to extrapolate and generalize. We've all different views and that puts a music piece in different contexts from one person to another. > So, can we dismiss this universality altogether? I think we can, at least in such a strong statement. However, we may accept that a great number of people enjoy a certain piece of music. But that is not saying that that piece is 'what the ear yearns for,' and thus we cannot infer its 'universality potential.' The question is: should we worry about it? I personally find more interesting a piece that can be delved in diverse ways, with a variety of approaches, even being consciously aware that my perception is absolutely different from everyone else's. In the end, it is your own taste that rules. Regards. -- __|__ ___\_/___ ___ Paulo Mouat, |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt |___| ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 11:19:45 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: Bower Bird... In-Reply-To: from "Robert M. Sanders" at Feb 4, 97 12:56:57 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert M. Sanders writes-- > >Are they monogamous? >I mean, do they mate for life? Depends on whether the boy bird can get the funding he needs. -- mike metlay * atomic city | = atomic@netcom.com = | NEWS FROM ATOMIC CITY: John 0 welcomes 1997.... info line: 1-800-924-atom | cd orders--> po box 81175 | "Hey, it's been five years, right? pittsburgh, pa 15217-0675 | Silence ends." or via the worldwide web: | http://pd.net/atomic-city | or phone _lofty pursuits_ | (Be afraid. Be *very* afraid.) toll free: 1-800-548-6724 | ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 11:44:22 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: Ego: the training wheel of creativity In-Reply-To: <32F81C48.1E89@hooked.net> from "Richard Lahrson" at Feb 4, 97 09:36:08 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Richard Lahrson writes-- > I need a MIDI controller. Big decision. >I can't decide. Wind controller? Keyboard? Theremin? Buchla Thunder? >Buchla LIghtning? Convert the Moog Prodigy to MIDI? > I'd like some feedback to the list on the subject of what type of >controllers folks are using and like, the pluses and minuses of MIDI >controller choice. Choose carefully. If you pick a nontraditional controller, be fairly sure that you're still going to be able to keep it running somewhere down the line. If you develop a technique for that controller and only one firm makes it and it goes bankrupt, you could be hosed. Technique counts as well. Think of how you enjoy moving when you make musical sounds, what sorts of controls you would want and how you would use them in composition, performance, and sound development. It may be that a more 'traditional' form of controller (drum pads, wind machine) would work for you, and add a measure of security to your future. As readers of this list know, I have been on a 20-year quest for the ultimate controller for my music. In the interim, I have gotten very good at working with the sorts of controls that a keyboard synth comes with, despite the fact that my keyboard technique is very rudimentary. I have tried a number of alternative controllers, but have yet to find one that 'clicks' on a fundamental level with me. This list includes, in no particular order, the Chapman MIDI Grid, the DrumKAT, the Steiner Lyricon, the Akai EWI and EVI, the Buchla Thunder, the Buchla Lightning, the Zendrum, the Dynacord Rhythm Stick, the Serge Keypad/Sequencer Module, the Yamaha G10, the Peavey MIDIBase and CyberBass, the Roland GR-77B with the traditional B-33 and more radical B-77 basses, any number of MIDI drum kits by Simmons and Yamaha, the Starr Z-Tar, the E-mu Launchpad, the Lexicon MRC, the Kawai MM-16, the Peavey PC-1600, the JLCooper Fadermaster.... Controllers I haven't written off entirely yet include the Yamaha WX7, the Starr Z-Bar, and the excellent Riday T-91, but I'm not at the shelling-out stage for any of them, and doubt I will be any time soon. mike -- mike metlay * atomic city | = atomic@netcom.com = | NEWS FROM ATOMIC CITY: John 0 welcomes 1997.... info line: 1-800-924-atom | cd orders--> po box 81175 | "Hey, it's been five years, right? pittsburgh, pa 15217-0675 | Silence ends." or via the worldwide web: | http://pd.net/atomic-city | or phone _lofty pursuits_ | (Be afraid. Be *very* afraid.) toll free: 1-800-548-6724 | ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 11:50:00 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU Subject: Re[2]: Is Art supposed to be universal? [Re: The Art Discuss Comments: To: jackysch@VEN.NET Jackysch wrote: >>Paulo Mouat wrote: >> >>> It would make more sense to discuss whether art is universal or >>> otherwise something very very personal. > >>both. > > > > >>-brad -------------------------------------------------------------___________________ >Maybe even more than that! and maybe less! to quote one famous artist who many people don't like any more "Less is More!" -Peter ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 21:00:27 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Nick Rothwell Subject: Re: Thomas Edison and Electronic Music Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >I'd much rather share tips and tricks, reviews of equipment, >pros and cons and other beneficial information the lot of us can benefit >from than the soliloquies I'm seeing of late. Let's talk equipment, >software, soundcards, samplers, synths, DATs, trends.... You're on the wrong mailing list. Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL contemporary dance projects http://www.cassiel.com music synthesis and control years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 18:18:08 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? -Reply I just remembered that story about the musician who heard a certain tone in his head all the time. At first, this tone was of benefit because he could use it to help him have a sort of perfect pitch by comparing true musical pitches to the pitch of the perceived internal tone and it did not really bother him. Eventually, however, after some years, he grew to resent the pervasive ever present tone and it drove him crazy. If there were some ideal piece of music, would it have to remain appealing after an arbitrarily large number of hearings? On the other hand, some things like Schoenberg and Ives sound less harsh with repeated listenings. This is known as the familiar "the piece grows on you with time" effect. Is it possible that a piece of music could grow in acceptance from repetition until it reached this "universal" ideal? ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 11:29:38 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: CFP - computational semiotics MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hello emusicians, this one's for the professor's [sic] If you think that it's a bit of obscure, I remind you that semiotics has been applied to music, most notably by Nattiez. Apologies to those who've seen this before. Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au ========================================================================== [headers snipped] Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 14:40:27 +0000 (GMT) From: ludman@austerlitz.devinci.fr (Irene Ludman) Subject: CALL FOR PAPERS : IWCS'97 Sender: owner-algo-comp@serial.music.uiowa.edu To: algo-comp@serial.music.uiowa.edu [more headers snipped] CALL FOR PAPERS 1st INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON COMPUTATIONAL SEMIOTICS 26th - 27th May, 1997 P=F4le Universitaire L=E9onard de Vinci PARIS - LA DEFENSE - FRANCE TOPICS SEMIOTICS OF TEXT : Suzanne Bertrand-Gastaldy, University of Montreal Computers are increasingly used to assist text analysis for cognitive,= literary, anthropological, sociological, documentary, etc. research. The workshop will focus on actual realisations, on the possibilities and limits= of methodologies and existing tools to take into account the complex and multidimensional nature of texts, allowing multiple points of views for a= variety of user needs. Issues such as desirable features of text analysis software, robustness and conviviality of implantations, interaction between= corpora and users, constraints that actual tools put upon kinds of analyses and coding choices, the ability to elaborate models of electronic= analytical tools suited to different semiotic theories, semiotical foundations of markup languages are examples of possible debates. SEMIOMETHODOLOGY : Claude Vogel, L=E9onard de Vinci University Several genres are currently under investigation for semiotic studies := electronic mail, news, corporate information, Web publishing. The flood of full text is overflowing semantic analysis, and this major paradigm break= leads us to reconsider our approach of text processing. The size of these new corpora, the lack of consistency of information, the physical scattering= of the basic units of texts, make the classical documentary solutions very uncomfortable. Instead, the semiotic based analysis seems to be a= highly compelling perspective. It is focused on chronology; it provides a= way to build transitive narratives throughout large amounts of data, and it does= not require the understanding of the details of each local grammatical sentence in order for a global plot to be elaborated. This promising trend= may give a second wind to ethnomethodology. For this reason, it is more appropriate to use the term "semiomethodology" when evoking this attempt to= rationalize the computational approach of the symbolic dynamics which underlie collaborative production. ORGANIZATIONAL SEMIOTICS : Kathleen Carley, Carnegie Mellon University Organizational semiotics is the semiotics of organizations and= organizational dimensions of textual semiotics. The objective of this= workshop is to define the boundaries of this new specialty. Specifically, we will address= the issue of : "How can semiotic analysis of interpersonal and corporate exchanges be used to reveal, evaluate, and contrast the underlying= organizational logics and changes in these logics over time ?" Recent= advances in textual analysis are facilitating this endeavor and creating new= opportunities for understanding organizational behavior. Critical issues in= the area of organizational semiotics include : 1) how to quickly and reliably analyze= large quantities of texts, 2) how to reduce textual data to an empirical form that can be combined with other types of data and analyzed= statistically, 3) how to identify corporate texts (those representing the= "view" of the organization as an entity) and address issues of authorship, and 4) how= to identify institutional constraints on the production and maintenance of corporate texts. New and innovative computational methods for empirically= analyzing texts are being developed to address these and related concerns. These techniques have the potential to move textual analysis= beyond counting words or locating a few themes or concepts. This section= will focus on the issues involved in performing organizational semiotics with= particular attention to the new computationally based techniques for facilitating organizational analysis that increase the ease, speed or= reliability of coding texts and generate information that can be analyzed statistically. BIOSEMIOTICS : Jean-Claude Heudin, L=E9onard de Vinci University Recently, algorithms and architectures based on models derived from= biological systems have been receiving an increasing amount of interest.= This section will explore how such new approaches and techniques could be used= for managing large amount of information exchanges on Internet or Intranet. Topics of particular interest include, but are not limited to, applications= of agent-based systems, autonomous and evolving agents, genetic algorithms and programming, neural networks, cellular automata etc. to text= stream analysis and in the more general framework of semiotics analysis. SUBMISSION OF PAPERS Send four copies of an abstract (approximately 500 words) in english or= email it to : Ir=E8ne Ludman - IWCS'97 P=F4le Universitaire L=E9onard de Vinci 92916 PARIS-LA DEFENSE-CEDEX, FRANCE=20 Phone: (33) 01 41 16 73 05=20 Fax : (33) 01 41 16 73 35 Email : irene.ludmann@devinci.fr DEADLINES Submission of abstracts=20 by 1st April 1997 Acceptance notification to authors by 15th April 1997 Submission of full papers by 12th May 1997 ORGANIZING COMMITTEE Claude Vogel (chairman) Suzanne Bertrand-Gastaldy Kathleen Carley Jean-Claude Heudin PROGRAM COMMITTE Pierre Boudon (canada) Guillaume Deffuant (France) Evelyne Lutton (France) Joe Porac (USA) Carl Roberts (USA) J. Sebeok (Canada) Peter Stockinger (France) Bill Turner (France) For more information please visit the following Web page := http://www.devinci.fr/home/actua.htm ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 20:33:40 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Alerative tunings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I don't have a clasical background so I am only vaguely familiar with the concepts of alternative tunings. I picked up somewhere that this is often related to variations in instruments and culture. Is this correct? I have been listening to Indian as in from India CDs and I am wondering how to best learn how the tuning differences defined? I don't want to sound like an idiot but please tell me more about alternative tuning techniques and where to begin exploring them. michael@voy.net ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 18:28:48 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Crandall Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) In-Reply-To: <32F79821.7365@mail.rbdc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Terry Leigh Britton wrote: > Nick Rothwell wrote: > > > > >> What is a Bower Bird? > > > > >http://www.dap.csiro.au:80/OPTECH/Optics-Radiometry/bower.html > > > > Was someone here sad enough to do a web search on "bower bird"? :-) (snip) > heh-heh... yes, and Nno-one refers to me as a compulsive-obsessive! > > (yet)... > > I found it an entertaining metaphor, I did! Or, for another entertaining metaphor on the relationship between art and survival (not to mention competition) try the Portia spider... ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 20:52:20 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Paulo Mouat wrote: > > > I can't help but bring up this cross-cultural impression: Humans are > > aware of two basic language tools: harmony and dissonance. Harmony (as > > that is determined by a particular culture, but pretty much meaning > > the same thing across cultures) refers to... things harmonious... > > uh... well... niceness. > > I think Niceness does not necessarily mean Harmony. The sounds of a > flowing stream may be quite nice in the background of a music piece. > They're far from being harmonious. > Excellent point! > > Dissonance refers to difficulty, tension, and not-so-niceness. > > There is some quite nice serial music, where tonal harmonic relations > are pretty much avoided. Niceness can be expressed by dissonance. Whereas I knew that was true for myself, I never considered it a univeral thing, but more an acquired taste. > Moreover, consonance can be very much unpleasant in such a scenario. That I can't imagine, but I'll take your word for it that you've had such an experience. > > And not to speak of certain pieces where the question of consonance/ > dissonance isn't applicable, at least in the usual sense of the words. > > > So, as much as I like Xanakis, he missed the smooth vs. the rough > > sections of his rock. People intrepret smooth things as smooth and > > rough things as rough. > > That's beside the point. The idea is that people have different ways of > looking at things, and will focus only on a subset of details. Granted. I was fishing for universality-elements here, but if someone's focus diverts them from noticing the smooth spots (or, conversely, the rough spots in my analogy) they will not be affected by them. So, your point is taken here as very valid! > > > In music, the interplay in time becomes laced with meaning. The > > details of interpretation may differ, but we'll both see 'happy' if > > 'happy' is being musiked at us. > > Except that a composer's idea of 'happy' may not succeed in being > understood as 'happy.' Naivete or plain obviousness come to mind. The composer's intentions need not enter into the argument for or against the 'universality' of a musical work or section. But, as to acquired tastes, it is true that a person may not be up to understanding the 'language' a composer is using, and thereby get it all wrong... That is obviously true of the classic 'man-on-the-street' with the opinion that all electronic music is is a bunch of noise. Here, we composers know what has been discovered in the way of language forms for the new compositions, and have 'educated ears.' But, it's hard to imagine there ever being an 'oldies' radio station for works which rely heavily upon dissonance and new musical structures. But maybe that's short sighted of me: a thousand years from now, harmonic elements may take on metaphoric meanings referring to negative times and events, and thus take on an entire new meaning in their use in a piece of music of that time... > > Our own perception may adapt better to certain composers, but as I said, > it would be erroneous to extrapolate and generalize. We've all > different views and that puts a music piece in different contexts from > one person to another. Or from one era to another? (In one era and out the other...heh...) > > > So, can we dismiss this universality altogether? > > I think we can, at least in such a strong statement. However, we may > accept that a great number of people enjoy a certain piece of music. > But that is not saying that that piece is 'what the ear yearns for,' and > thus we cannot infer its 'universality potential.' Now you've got me thinking (not an easy task, you deserve high praise). This idea I touched upon above of the meaning being referential rather than universal may be an interesting jumping-off point for some exploration for me. Charles Ives (who walked and often camped on the same ground where I grew up) seemed to be taking up this 'referentiality' vs. 'universality' when he interlaced snippets of 'pop' and other important tunes of his day amidst completely dissimilar chord structures. And, of course, people with samplers play with this kind of thing in a pop format all the time now, changing the referential mood of familiar things. Musique Concrete also. But as it applies to this discussion, perhaps a turn instead to discussing the/our *referential* nature, and how this is or can (or could) be exploited. > > The question is: should we worry about it? I personally find more > interesting a piece that can be delved in diverse ways, with a variety > of approaches, even being consciously aware that my perception is > absolutely different from everyone else's. In the end, it is your own > taste that rules. I will stop worrying. ;) Maybe therein lies another depth to the idea of 'getting out of the way of your music.' After all, the listener rules, as you say. Gut-feeling: Mastering the referential set of the currently accepted 'universalities' of our present time can make one a pretty powerful composer in their own time. > > Regards. > -- > __|__ > ___\_/___ > ___ Paulo Mouat, > |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt > |___| -- Thanks for the brain-food. Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 20:46:42 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Ed Gonzalez Subject: Re: unsubscribe Dear Emusic, I will at your request unsubscribe but you know what I want a full explanation on why I should?Not a two sentence letter. Ed Gonzalez ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 21:02:14 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? -Reply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert M. Sanders wrote: > > I just remembered that story about the musician who heard a certain tone > in his head all the time. At first, this tone was of benefit because he > could use it to help him have a sort of perfect pitch by comparing true > musical pitches to the pitch of the perceived internal tone and it did not > really bother him. Eventually, however, after some years, he grew to > resent the pervasive ever present tone and it drove him crazy. > > If there were some ideal piece of music, would it have to remain > appealing after an arbitrarily large number of hearings? > > On the other hand, some things like Schoenberg and Ives sound less > harsh with repeated listenings. This is known as the familiar "the piece > grows on you with time" effect. Is it possible that a piece of music could > grow in acceptance from repetition until it reached this "universal" ideal? Well, I don't know about where you live, but my local radio stations aren't exactly spinning Schoenberg and Ives tunes every hour (or day, or week, or month..), so I'm not sure how much of a chance they have to 'gain acceptance through repetition.' ;) -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 18:07:51 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Brian Good Subject: Re: Ego: the training wheel of creativity Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Richard Lahrson writes: >Too much gear can be a bad thing. KISS (keep it simple stupid) is >the way. I play amped alto flute, Moog Prodigy both through a Zoom 9002 >(small, light, AC\DC, two delays and +\- one octave pitch shift). > I've added a Soundblaster 16 with the first Waveblaster >daughterboard to the PC. I've ordered the MIDI adapter cable from >Soundblaster in Sweetwater, OK. Incredibly the MIDI adapter has been >discontinued but is still stock. I need a MIDI controller. Big decision. >I can't decide. Wind controller? Keyboard? Theremin? Buchla Thunder? >Buchla LIghtning? Convert the Moog Prodigy to MIDI? > I'd like some feedback to the list on the subject of what type of >controllers folks are using and like, the pluses and minuses of MIDI >controller choice. I've played the EWI wind controller for quite awhile, driving (at various times) a Matrix 1000, a Wavestation A/D, and, recently, a K2000 and a VL1m. In my biased opinion, a wind controller is the most expressive commonly (?) available MIDI controller (not having used Thunder&Lightning, I can't comment). I imagine that, being a flute player, you'd find controlling volume and timbre with your lips and diaphragm more natural than using pedals or aftertouch on a keyboard. Certainly a lot of your flute technique would carry over. On the negative side: wind controllers are really solo instruments. As such, they're fine for live play with a band or with sequenced accompaniment. Making them sound interesting by themselves is more problematic. It is possible, barely, to do interesting real-time accompaniment with one. The Yamaha controllers are very limited this way--you can basically play drones or single-note parallel harmony, either of which will quickly put you to sleep. The EWI will let you define chords of up to four notes, one per chromatic tone, but even this wears thin pretty quickly. You can use this feature to get interesting and varied harmonies (e.g. Michael Brecker's EWI/Xpander tricks) if you have the right synth or enjoy writing MAX objects. And you should be aware that, out of the box, almost all synths will not work well with wind controllers. They all seem to assume that you will control them with a keyboard, and hence with ADSR envelopes, which are largely irrelevant for wind controllers. The only exception I know of (besides the little Akai and Yamaha boxes that come with certain controllers) is the VL1, which *screams* for either a wind controller or something else that can throw a lot of control data at it. In particular, I'm not even sure the Sound Blaster will work with a wind controller. Does it understand CC#2? Can you use CC#2 as a modulation source to control volume, filter cutoff, etc? (The SB *does* have a filter of some kind, doesn't it?). Brian Good W: bgood@sundagger.lerc.nasa.gov H: bgood@earthlink.net ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 01:37:42 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit David Crandall wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Terry Leigh Britton wrote: > > > Nick Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > >> What is a Bower Bird? > > > > > > >http://www.dap.csiro.au:80/OPTECH/Optics-Radiometry/bower.html > > > > > > Was someone here sad enough to do a web search on "bower bird"? :-) > > (snip) > > > heh-heh... yes, and Nno-one refers to me as a compulsive-obsessive! > > > > (yet)... > > > > I found it an entertaining metaphor, I did! > > Or, for another entertaining metaphor on the relationship between art and > survival (not to mention competition) try the Portia spider... OK, you asked for it! Vibratory Deceitfulness and Versatility in Jumping Spiders of the Genus Portia Stim Wilcox, Binghamton University, USA Robert Jackson, University of Canterbury, New Zealand Species of Portia forage mainly as aggressive mimics which invade the webs of other spider species and lure their victims with signals made by plucking, drumming, shaking, etc., on the webs. Portia uses a wide variety of ploys to capture its prey, including apparent imitation of insect struggle patterns as well as imitation of one heterogeneric mating signal, trial and error learning for choice of signals, detour behavior, and "smokescreen behavior", the opportunistic use of background noise on webs to mask stalking movements. Portia also makes its own "smokescreen signal" which apparently simultaneously masks its stalking movement and imitates environmental noise such as dropping twigs. ..................................................................... Personally, I resent the analogy... I'm not a percussionist....! ;) -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 09:25:11 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: NEC_CEELY@FLO.ORG Subject: Un-subscribe Please un subscribe me. Thanks ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 09:25:06 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Joe McMahon Subject: Re: unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <970205195919_1048319214@emout05.mail.aol.com> from "Ed Gonzalez" at Feb 5, 97 08:46:42 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Dear Emusic, > > > I will at your request unsubscribe but you know what I want a > full explanation on why I should?Not a two sentence letter. > > Ed Gonzalez > Write me direct. Something sounds wrong about this. Forward me the letter if you have it. --- Joe M. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 09:33:40 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Randy Meeker Subject: Re: Bower Bird & mating for life - comic relief Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Last year a friend of mine upgraded from GirlFriend 1.0 to Wife 1.0 and found that it's a memory hog, leaving very little system resources available for other applications. He is now noticing that Wife 1.0 is also spawning Child Processes which are further consuming valuable resources. No mention of this particular phenomena was included in the product brochure or the documentation, though other users have informed him that this is to be expected due to the nature of the application. Not only that, Wife 1.0 installs itself such that it is always launched at system initialization, where it can monitor all other system activity. He's finding that some applications such as PokerNight 10.3, BeerBash 2.5, and PubNight 7.0 are no longer able to run in the system at all, crashing the system when selected (even though they always worked fine before). During installation, Wife 1.0 provides no option as to the installation of undesired Plug-Ins such as MotherInLaw 55.8 and BrotherInLaw Beta release. Also, system performance seems to diminish with each passing day. Some features he'd like to see in the upcoming wife 2.0. - - - A "Don't remind me again" button - - - Minimize button - - - An install shield feature that allows Wife 2.0 be installed with the option to uninstall at anytime without the loss of cache and other system resources. I myself decided to avoid the headaches associated with Wife 1.0 by sticking with Girlfriend 2.0. Even here, however, I found many problems. Apparently you cannot install Girlfriend 2.0 on top of Girlfriend 1.0. You must uninstall Girlfriend 1.0 first. Other users say this is a long standing bug that I should have known about. You'd think they would have fixed such a stupid bug by now. To make matters worse, the uninstall program for Girlfriend 1.0 doesn't work very well, leaving undesirable traces of the application in the system.(Editorial comment: The uninstall button should have an added feature. Upon activation, the user's joystick should be permanently disabled - What do you think? Too harsh?) Another thing -- all versions of Girlfriend continually pop up little annoying messages about the advantages of upgrading to Wife 1.0 ***** BUG WARNING ******** Wife 1.0 has an undocumented bug. If you try to install Mistress 1.1 before uninstalling Wife 1.0, Wife 1.0 will delete MSMoney files before doing the uninstall itself. Then Mistress 1.1 will refuse to install, claiming insufficient resources. More applications that won't run with Wife 1.0 include Golfing 2.3, Softball 3.6, and Cubgamewatching 2.7. Applications that run very well with Wife 1.0, however, include Fixthis 1.1, Waitforme 3.5, and Couldupickthisuponthewayhome 5.7!!!! ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:31:39 +0000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Eric Harnden (Ronin)" Subject: (Fwd) Fwd: Heaviness; Masochism - (funmail) >Dear Dr. Science, > >Since helium is lighter than air, does a helium tank get lighter or >heavier as you empty it? > >------------------- Carey Smith Moorman, Carlinville, IL > >A helium tank is actually a vacuum of sorts, one that sucks the >heaviness out of things. So when a helium tank is connected to a >balloon, it's merely removing the heaviness from the balloon. The >law of Conservation of Energy and Mass demands that heaviness go >somewhere, and it goes into the tank. When you return the tank to >the chemical supply shop, they sell that heaviness to record >companies where it is used to give substance to popular music. >People who handle such heaviness must wear rubber gloves, because >absorbing heaviness through the skin can result in depression, a >natural consequence of working with popular culture in any form. > -------====< Entropy Eventually Wins >====--------- Eric Harnden (Ronin) (202)885-2746 ... harnden@physics.american.edu ---===< And I Like To Be On The Winning Side >===--- ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:30:59 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <970205195919_1048319214@emout05.mail.aol.com> from "Ed Gonzalez" at Feb 5, 97 08:46:42 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ed Gonzalez writes-- > Dear Emusic, > > > I will at your request unsubscribe but you know what I want a >full explanation on why I should?Not a two sentence letter. > > Ed Gonzalez I beg your pardon? Who asked you to unsubscribe? Please send us the letter in question at once; do so to our private mail boxes, not to the list. That would be atomic@tesser.com, with a copy to mcmahon@clark.net. I don't recall having a recent need to have anyone leave the list (despite my blusterings, it doesn't happen all THAt often), and Joe hasn't sent me any word on anything of the sort. Thanks, and let's see if we can get this cleared up. mike -- mike metlay * atomic city | = atomic@netcom.com = | NEWS FROM ATOMIC CITY: John 0 welcomes 1997.... info line: 1-800-924-atom | cd orders--> po box 81175 | "Hey, it's been five years, right? pittsburgh, pa 15217-0675 | Silence ends." or via the worldwide web: | http://pd.net/atomic-city | or phone _lofty pursuits_ | (Be afraid. Be *very* afraid.) toll free: 1-800-548-6724 | ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 19:53:26 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Verraes Subject: Re: Perfect Art MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Terry Leigh Britton wrote: > Verraes wrote: > > > > I believe that the object in creating a piece of art, is to achieve > > perfectness, by eliminating all things that obstruct you from creating art. > > All things such as what? Media? (paint, canvas, synth, DAT, or dead > batteries?) Suppose I am in the middle of recording an improvised solo on my keyboard and I feel it's extremely good. Suddenly the phone rings. When I get back, I can't possibly play the same thing I had in my head again. If I didn't have a phone, I'd have written a better peice of art. Or, suppose I've got some great ideas for an essay on the function of Art in religion, but I am tired, fall asleep and forget it all. Or what if I can't find the right colors to mix for my painting. Or what if I'm somewhere without anything to write my ideas on. Anything can make your art less good than it is in your head. > > Of course no-one ever achieved perfectness and no-one ever will. But I > > think this is not only because there is always something that obstructs > > you, but also because art can only exist within it's obstructions. > > I know you have a set of obstructions defined that lends validity and > great import to that statement. Please let us know what obstructions you > refer to. > > Once a > > piece of art is perfect, it is no longer art. > > What is it then? A god? (heh)... If it's perfect, it doesn't exist. To remove it's obstructions, your mind must be perfect too. Maybe that a God could make perfect art. (Maybe is the whole universe the one and only perfect creation of a god and are we too dumb to see how perfect it is. - but this is more a theological topic) > > This is only a theory I recently developped, and it still needs lots of > > corrections (maybe it is completely wrong). Any comments are welcome. > > > > Comment: Don't stop. With this theory more fully developed, we may see > more clearer the whole picture. > Terry Leigh Britton > > http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ One must not forget that this is nothing but (another) theory. The only valuable part for practice is that anyone who considers himself as an artist, should try to make perfect art. btw Being perfect includes being universal. _________________________ Mathias Verraes eat.my.shorts@glo.be 'Aequalitas haud parit bellum' _________________________ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 11:05:53 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: Alerative tunings In-Reply-To: <32F934F3.32C5@voy.net> from "Michael Millard" at Feb 5, 97 08:33:40 pm MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael Millard writes-- > >I don't have a clasical background so I am only vaguely familiar >with the concepts of alternative tunings. I picked up somewhere that >this is often related to variations in instruments and culture. Is this >correct? I have been listening to Indian as in from India CDs and I am >wondering how to best learn how the tuning differences defined? > I don't want to sound like an idiot but please tell me more >about alternative tuning techniques and where to begin exploring them. You don't need a classical background to know about alternative tunings; most classically trained musicians have no chance to work with them, and most academically traind musicians only are exposed to them in classes on ethnomusicology. There are many, many experts on the subject on this list, so I'll just put out a few introductory remarks before letting them post. Basically, the idea of alternate tunings is that there is nothing sacred about the traditional Western equally tempered scale with 12 notes per octave. That scale arose out of a need to compromise on tuning of keyboard and fretted instruments, whose pitches are fixed. (Contrast this to fretless instruments or voices, where the precise pitch is left up to the player.) And that compromise itself is layered on a centuries-old tradition of having 12 notes per octave, with assorted different pitch relationships between notes depending on what you were trying to make sound the best. In a brutally simple way, an equally tempered scale, where a semitone is a frequency change of 2 to the power of 1/12, gives you perfect octaves, but intervals don't work out perfectly. There are mathematical relationships between frequencies that we understand as intervals, like fourths and fifths, but the equal temperament misses those perfect intervals slightly, and we hear those differences. But beyond that, the 12-note scale is a European conceit. Many other musical forms exist with their own numbers of notes in a scale: they have their own tunings within the octave, and tend to choose pitch relationships that the Western ear finds alien. A good example of this is Balinese gamelan, which uses a very simple scale with intervals the Westerner needs to get used to. So, "alternate tuning" falls into three categories: One, attempts to improve upon the sounds of intervals beyond what the equal temperament system allows. These tuning adjustments area usually termed "just intonation," and has many proponents in classical music. Early-music work is often performed in the tunings of the day. Two, understanding scalings that have nothing at all to do with the 12-note scale, like Balinese, Indian, or Eskimo music. This is the realm of so-called "world musicians" and ethnomusicologists, and is gaining wider acceptance as non-Western music finds its way into the mainstream. Three, exploring tuning systems that have no relation at all to anything anyone ever came up with as a traditional form, such as quarter-tone (24-note-per-octave) or 31-note-per-octave scales or the intensive alpha and beta scales of Wendy Carlos, where even octave relationships are sacrificed in the name of microscipically accurate intervals. This, due to the computational power and accuracy of digital synthesizers, is almost exclusively the realm of the electronic musician. Now I'll let everyone ELSE jump in and correct me on this stuff (and hopefully suggest some good source material); the only really good record I know of that not only uses alternate tunings but attempts to teach something about them at the same time is Wendy Carlos's "Beauty In The Beast," but I'm sure there must be others. mike -- mike metlay * atomic city | = atomic@netcom.com = | NEWS FROM ATOMIC CITY: John 0 welcomes 1997.... info line: 1-800-924-atom | cd orders--> po box 81175 | "Hey, it's been five years, right? pittsburgh, pa 15217-0675 | Silence ends." or via the worldwide web: | http://pd.net/atomic-city | or phone _lofty pursuits_ | (Be afraid. Be *very* afraid.) toll free: 1-800-548-6724 | ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 18:30:03 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Verraes Subject: Creation vs. Performance (Was: Re: Perfect Art -Reply) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Art is usually divided in two elements: Creation and Performance. Depending on the medium, one can be more important than the other. A good piece of music is art, wether the orchestra plays it in a good or a bad way. Same for books: a book stays good, even if the reader was to confused, ignorant,... to read it. But is a song art if it only exists in your head, or must it first be played to be art ? Robert M. Sanders wrote: > Verraes and Britton wrote: > < > I believe that the object in creating a piece of art, is to achieve > perfectness, by eliminating all things that obstruct you from creating art. > > All things such as what? Media? (paint, canvas, synth, DAT, or dead > batteries?) > > > > I think the "obstruction" is the intrusion of self awareness partially > distancing and distracting the audience (including the creater) > > Extending Sinbyte's model, (STIMULUS ~~~~~> RESPONSE): > > if in the mind of the audience there are more STIMULI than just the one(s) > you as composer/performer/artist are providing, you have reduced > influence on the RESPONSE. > > As a seasoned audience member, I remember the following STIMULI > competing with the "entertainment" > > * stomach sensations > * attractive members of the opposite sex, both in the audience and on > stage > * any petty arguments over dinner > * the smells of the place > * how to slip out that "silent wind" without anybody noticing or knowing I > did it > * loud talking > * coughing > * room temperature > * where to put my coat, or my wife's coat (inevitably on my lap) > * my pre-existing impression of the performers, etc. > * preoccupation with thoughts like, "did I turn off the headlights?" ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 14:35:41 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Crandall Subject: Arnold's choice fo friends (Re: Is Art supposed to be universal?) In-Reply-To: <32F93BA6.4C0@mail.rbdc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 5 Feb 1997, Terry Leigh Britton wrote: > Well, I don't know about where you live, but my local radio stations > aren't exactly spinning Schoenberg and Ives tunes every hour (or day, or (etc) Yeah, but you can certainly hear knockoffs of Schoenberg (or, for that matter, Penderecki) in things like film scores, but then that just reinforces a stereotypical association of perceived dissonance with terror, insanity, etc. Hmm...insanity on the one hand, academia on the other, poor Arnold just don't stand a chance... But again a major light bulb went off in my head when a reviewer described some of Part's 12-tone clusters ion one of the symphonies) as "festive" and I suddenly understood (and heard) what he meant. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 18:58:55 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Paulo Mouat Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? -Reply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Well, I don't know about where you live, but my local radio stations > aren't exactly spinning Schoenberg and Ives tunes every hour (or day, > or week, or month..), so I'm not sure how much of a chance they have > to 'gain acceptance through repetition.' ;) I guess everything else already did. -- __|__ ___\_/___ ___ Paulo Mouat, |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt |___| ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 19:53:50 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Paulo Mouat Subject: Re: Is Art supposed to be universal? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Terry Leigh Britton wrote: > > Niceness can be expressed by dissonance. > Whereas I knew that was true for myself, I never considered it a > univeral thing, but more an acquired taste. Is there anything that isn't an aquired taste? > > Moreover, consonance can be very much unpleasant in such a scenario. > > That I can't imagine, but I'll take your word for it that you've had > such an experience. It is easy to try. If you play or compose a piece with a certain degree of overall dissonance, consonance may sound unpleasant. > The composer's intentions need not enter into the argument for or > against the 'universality' of a musical work or section. Would it still be universal? It would seem that the composer himself is left out of the so-called 'universal' meaning of his piece. > Here, we composers know what has been discovered in the way of > language forms for the new compositions, and have 'educated ears.' Those 'educated ears' may prevent you from fully grasping a piece. For one, they are a major influence (and extraneous to the piece) in your approach to it. > But as it applies to this discussion, perhaps a turn instead to > discussing the/our *referential* nature, and how this is or can (or > could) be exploited. I usually dislike this referential nature. At least when it means quoting popular tunes and musical phrases or when it employs musical material in a large scale. On the other hand, if the reference is more abstract (as, for instance, in the translation of a process) or more atomized (as the electroacoustical manipulations of musique concrete), it provides a very subtle starting point, relying with minimal weight on past experiences (both the composer's and the audience's). > I will stop worrying. ;) Maybe therein lies another depth to the idea > of 'getting out of the way of your music.' After all, the listener > rules, as you say. Not exactly. Your ears rule your particular taste for a piece of music, which may be based on different subsets of details than anybody else's. I don't compose for the pleasure of the audience above all else; first, I compose for myself, since only once I am satisfied with the result will I consider the piece worth listening by anybody else. Even if nobody else will end up appreciating the piece. > Gut-feeling: Mastering the referential set of the currently accepted > 'universalities' of our present time can make one a pretty powerful > composer in their own time. It is not a matter of power. Not even of one's own time. It is a matter of self-satisfaction and pleasure above all. And I am speaking of a truly pleasant experience, not satisfaction and pleasure in purely breaking new ground and generating controversy. Moreover, I think advances in deeper understanding of the phenomenon of music perception occur in quantum leaps, not as a strict continuum. This undoubtedly is indebted to those composers who were ahead of their time, and maybe denies the value of the search for 'currently accepted universalities' in itself. The use of these 'currently accepted universalities' bears the stigma of self-indulgence and lazyness, and of a static culture. Regards. -- __|__ ___\_/___ ___ Paulo Mouat, |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt |___| ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 11:13:00 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU Subject: Re[2]: Is Art supposed to be universal? -Reply Comments: To: brittont@RBDC.RBDC.COM Well, I don't know about where you live, but my local radio stations aren't exactly spinning Schoenberg and Ives tunes every hour (or day, or week, or month..), so I'm not sure how much of a chance they have to 'gain acceptance through repetition.' ;) -- I seem to remeber hearing how the BBC for a while (early 70s?) was playing lots of "advanced" music, and it was going over somewhat favorably after the had been doing it. Since I've never lived in the UK, I don't know any details about this (even if it is correct), nor do I know I know why the stopped what I think is a good and evtertaining practice. Can I get some hel from someone one the other side of the Atlantic pond on this one? -Peter ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 07:14:19 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Rodger Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Terry just told us about the Species of Portia (or perhaps he was just relaying information). Anway, this spider... > lure their victims with signals made by plucking, drumming, shaking, etc., on > the webs. Portiauses a wide variety of ploys to capture its prey, including > apparent imitation o > f insect struggle patterns as well as imitation of one heterogeneric mating signal, etc. Mike, maybe this is the controller you've been looking for. ;-) Regards, David musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au http://farben.latrobe.edu.au/d_rodger/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 19:31:24 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Paul Geffen Subject: Alternative scales and tunings Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" For a fine example of alternative scales with a Western flavor, try Easley Blackwood's Twelve Microtonal Etudes (opus 28) and other related works, on CD: Cedille 90000 018 He explores even-tempered scales of eight, nine, ten, eleven, ... all the way up to twenty notes per octave, in short compositions for electronic instrument. Rhythmically it is fairly predictable, mostly neo-Baroque. And harmonically it is also surprisingly conventional, except for the "extra" or "missing" notes in the scales ... Charles Ives (I think it was) wrote some microtonal music for two pianos tuned a quarter tone apart. Does anyone know of a recording of these pieces? - Paul http://www.tiac.net/users/lpaul/music.html Paul Geffen SQA, Inc. http://www.tiac.net/users/lpaul ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 18:18:38 -0700 Reply-To: krikawa@theriver.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Krikawa Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > lure their victims with signals made by plucking, drumming, shaking, etc., on > > the webs. Portiauses a wide variety of ploys to capture its prey, including > > apparent imitation o > > f insect struggle patterns as well as imitation of one heterogeneric mating signal, > > etc. > > Mike, maybe this is the controller you've been looking for. ;-) . . .sound like a better Controller than Randy's Wife 1.0. Randy: you need a serious system upgrade Dude; and a co-processor for those feelings. ;) krikawa@theriver.com ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 18:45:07 -0700 Reply-To: krikawa@theriver.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Krikawa Subject: Re: Alerative tunings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Michael Millard writes-- > > > >I don't have a clasical background so I am only vaguely familiar > >with the concepts of alternative tunings. I picked up somewhere that > >this is often related to variations in instruments and culture. Is this > >correct? I have been listening to Indian as in from India CDs and I am > >wondering how to best learn how the tuning differences defined? [very accurate stuff by Mike deleted] Michael, if you have some gear that's micro-tuneable, let us know what you have. We may be able to give you some concrete examples/suggestions you can try out on your gear while simultaneously keeping the discussion in the EMUSIC-L realm. After reading Mike's post, take a moment and try to imagine that you have never heard traditional music before. . .maybe just birds, ambient noise, etc. What would you do to layer sounds so it sounded good to you? How would you combine them to make music? How many different tones would you use in an octave? Who knows! Anything is possible. It is pretty hard to break from tone combinations that sound consonant and dissonant to our Western ears. I certainly don't use alternative tunings much, but I like to play with them. What sounds strange at first, often turns beautiful. -john krikawa@theriver.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 13:41:46 +1000 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Clive McFarland Subject: Re: Oh, Oh, I'm gonna quit In-Reply-To: <32F8927D.6B99@voy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > I hear people >even get flamed on the pottery list. > Nope: they get fired. Regards Clive Clive McFarland CSIRO Australia clive@pelican.dbe.csiro.au ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 22:38:02 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Terry Leigh Britton Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit David Rodger wrote: > > Terry just told us about the Species of Portia > (or perhaps he was just relaying information). Anway, this spider... > > > lure their victims with signals made by plucking, drumming, shaking, etc., on > > the webs. Portiauses a wide variety of ploys to capture its prey, including > > apparent imitation o > > f insect struggle patterns as well as imitation of one heterogeneric mating signal, > > etc. > > Mike, maybe this is the controller you've been looking for. ;-) > > Regards, David > musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au > http://farben.latrobe.edu.au/d_rodger/ Hah! So, now it's a race to see who can get their postcards to the patent offices first with the world's one and only original WEB CONTROLLER! (actually a viable idea...eh?) :) -- Terry Leigh Britton http://www.rbdc.com/~brittont/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 23:45:12 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Marcus Hobbs Subject: alternate/exotic tunings In-Reply-To: Automatic digest processor "EMUSIC-L Digest - 6 Feb 1997 to 7 Feb 1997" (Feb 7, 1:00am) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > But beyond that, the 12-note scale is a European conceit. Many other > musical forms exist with their own numbers of notes in a scale: they > have their own tunings within the octave, and tend to choose pitch well said, michael. i am very excited to see people in this forum so open-minded to alternate tunings. i think we are on the verge of a massive tuning revolution. i've been composing in alternate tunings for about 2 years now. i don't think i'll ever write another tune in 12 tone equal temperament (12 TET) ever again. i'm just thoroughly weary of it. i'm studying with erv wilson, a heavy microtonal scale design expert. it's really opened my ears. scales can be arbitrary pitches, but clever choices produce fascinating properties among intervals. 12 TET construction is derived from a closed chain of impure fifths. thus, typical 12 TET music strategies are based on traversing/modulating along this closed chain, eventually ending up where you started. a great paradigm, but after 300+ years of it, i'm bored. it's like looking at great rennaissance paintings for hundreds of years and then seeing your first monet, van gogh, etc. i don't think i'll ever need to go back. as a contrast, let me give you a very specific (and non-representative) example of an alternate tuning: erv's combination product set (cps) tunings. basically, erv constructs geometric objects by permutations of products of overtones. for example, choosing every 2 permutations of (1,3,5,7) gives you 1*3,1*5,1*7,3*5,3*7,5*7 for a total of six tones per octave (more suitable for harmonic, than melodic purposes, but there are denser cps's). to convert this to a scale, you would octave reduce each product. in this case, 3/2, 5/4, 7/4, 15/16, 21/16, and 35/32. note that 3/2 is a perfect fifth, 5/4 is a major third, etc. you can include the optional 1/1, but there is much orthodoxy about that. then, convert these to hertz but choosing a base frequency, and multiplying by powers of two to place the frequency in the registers of the keyboard. i use a kyma exclusively, and have written much code to do all this tuning interactively. the downside is that i have to create all my sounds. the upside is that i do techno/trance. so it's actually a good thing. choosing 2 out of 4 maps to a hexany. sorry i can't draw it here, but if you look at the xenharmonicon archives for issue #12, erv goes into great detail of not only the hexany, but the general cases. i'm learning how to work with 3 out of 6 (20 tones per octave) which is called the eikosany. also, you don't need to use (1,3,5,7). i like to use fibonacci sequences because the difference tones of all the intervals line up with at least one other interval, which i believe creates a wonderful pitch perspective. (5,7,12,19) is an incredible bluesy hexany. the kyma sounds i wrote let you change these numbers in real time. what's fascinating about these tunings is that you are no longer in the paradigm of traversing a closed chain of fifths. instead, you are traversing the vertices of a high-dimensional object. there are many different types of modulation in this system (in 12 TET, there is only one type of modulation--you move the whole system over to a new tonic). i'm composing a techno album entirely in alternate tunings. it should be complete by june. i'll shamelessly promote it on this list, i'm sure. i got started in alternate tunings by reading the following web pages: http://www.tiac.net/users/xen/xh.html http://www.dnai.com:80/~jinetwk/ also, if any of you have a kyma, let me know. i can mail you many exotic tuning sounds that you are welcome to use. marcus ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 16:03:06 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: DEVOTION Subject: Go buy the Roland JP8000 Comments: To: SYNTH-L@AMERICAN.EDU, KLF@xmission.com, electronica@maths.exeter.ac.uk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I just spent several hours testing the JP8000. The conclusion is, that this time, Roland has done it (again). I' producing dance records on a semi pro level, and therefore my thoughts about this keyboard are a little coloured by that. The keyboard is very much aimed at the dance marked. There are no saxophones, guitars, trumpets or any other non-typical-dance instrument. Roland has only put three categories of sound into it : 1. Synth bass 2. Pads 3. Effects The sound quality is absolutely amazing! I'm used to the good qulity in my E3 or my JV80, but this really kicks ass. And the sounds are very useable. Especially the synth-stuff, where you want to control the cut off and res. The point is : if you are into any type of modern music (dance oriented), this is the machine to get. I know the some of you have tried it and dislike it (maby because it will make the prices of old Juno's and so go down again), but I'm willing to make a bet : this will be the most prized AND sold synth in '97. Just wait and see! -- Over 'n out! :] DEVOTION '97 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 09:31:59 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: DEVOTION Subject: Are the subjects still debateable? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm thinking of how much money I've "wasted" on the art- and techo discussions on this list lately. I joined this list to discus electronic music (i.e. keyboards, samplers, use of sequencers and so), and I didn't expect it to be a list where 90% of the mail would discuss philosophical thoughts about music. -- Over 'n out! :] DEVOTION '97 ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 00:53:51 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "M. Nail" Subject: microtonality via midi MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII while we're on the topic of microtonality, is there a way to do this via midi? I know midi sends note on/off for 12 notes/octave, how do you get around it? pitch bend messages? what about for *really* dumb midi synths? --- mnail@u.washington.edu //--- "A racing car adorned with great pipes like serpents with explosive breath and seeming to run on grapeshot... is more beautiful than the Winged Victory of Samothrace" -Filippo Marinetti ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 14:12:43 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Luca de Marinis Organization: Interseg Subject: Re: microtonality via midi MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit M. Nail wrote: > > while we're on the topic of microtonality, is there a way to do this via > midi? I know midi sends note on/off for 12 notes/octave, how do you get > around it? pitch bend messages? Well,if the synth in not micro-tunable,the only way seems pitch bend..altrough I'm not sure if it can be enough accurate. Let's see.. The pitch bend controller is 14 bits,that's +-128 steps.If pitch bend sens.is set to 2 octaves,resolution is less than one cent,so shouldn't do. If Sens is 1 octave,in theory good resolution should be reached. Only,Altrough the controller is 14 bits,I'm not sure that all synths really use all of them. Some may use only the high word,or high word+some bits of the lower one.. > What about for *really* dumb midi > synths? No way,I guess.. Yahozna -- Luca S. G. de Marinis http://www.interseg.it/~trance/ Developing Chaos ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 06:52:31 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Paul Geffen Subject: Re: microtonality via midi Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 12:53 AM 2/7/97 -0800, you wrote: >while we're on the topic of microtonality, is there a way to do this via >midi? I know midi sends note on/off for 12 notes/octave, how do you get >around it? pitch bend messages? what about for *really* dumb midi >synths? > You need a smart synth. The DX7 II (for example) allows you to program the pitch of each key separately, and it comes with some microtonal preset scales (as well as a number of interesting 12-tone tunings). Then you can use MIDI to fire the keys, but you have to remember that the "note" numbers no longer correspond to the usual pitch values. - Paul Paul Geffen SQA, Inc. http://www.tiac.net/users/lpaul ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 08:57:25 EST Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: William B Fox Subject: EMUSIC Playlist Playlist for "EMUSIC" on WDIY-FM, Allentown 88.1 FM in Allentown/Bethleham and 93.9 FM in Easton/Phillipsburg Show #3 February 6, 1997 Host: Bill Fox This show started the month-long focus on the emusic scene in the Netherlands. Each week, a CD will be featured at midnight. ARTIST TRACK ALBUM (label) ----------------------- ----------------------- ------------------------------- 11:00 pm S. Roach/V. Obmana Middle World Passage Cavern of Sirens (Projekt) Tom Vedvik India Ink Slowdiver (Cyber Octave) Alter)ring Infinitely Gentle Blows TheEventHorizon t (CityofTribes) Alpha Wave Movement Transcendences Transendence (HarmonicResonance) Ben Neill Ether Green Machine (Astralwerks) 12:00 am Ron Boots G.O.A.M. (Sleep Walker) Ghost of a Mist (Cue) Ron Boots In Timeroom Spirits Ghost of a Mist (Cue) Ron Boots G.O.A.M.(RingMistMtn.) Ghost of a Mist (Cue) Ron Boots On the Field Ghost of a Mist (Cue) Ron Boots Desert Clouds Ghost of a Mist (Cue) 1:00 am Sign off ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:06:49 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Michael Millard Subject: Re: Alerative tunings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Krikawa wrote: > > Michael, if you have some gear that's micro-tuneable, let us know what > you have. We may be able to give you some concrete > examples/suggestions > you can try out on your gear while simultaneously keeping the > discussion in > the EMUSIC-L realm. > Well, I have been one of the guys who collects stuff but never or at least seldomly sells off the last peice. I can not bring myself to buy something new and discard the previous piece. What happens if the new item doesn't work as I plan, cann't reproduce a sound I like extra. The learning curve alone keeps older stuff in my studio. I have a veriety of things but I think the synths that I have which probaby would handle micro tuning would be my TG77, Wavestations SR and AD and my K2000. I also have a Morpheus which might handle the job too. Since I've never done it I can not say for sure. I am also curious about samplers. Can you not duplicate any sort of tuning with them? Do Computer based sequencers handle the use of alternative tunings? I would expect that they are indiferent to the tuning being used. Is this accurate? michael@voy.net ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:04:17 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Randy Meeker Subject: Most Useful Key on the Keyboard Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Thanks expressed to the deity in charge of creating the Delete Key! ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:17:42 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Randy Meeker Subject: (Fwd) Fwd: Heaviness; Masochism - (funmail) -Reply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain And the sky is blue because they ran out of green...come on Dr. Science what did you get your PhD in ...Art? >>> "Eric Harnden (Ronin)" 02/06/97 05:31am >>> >Dear Dr. Science, > >Since helium is lighter than air, does a helium tank get lighter or >heavier as you empty it? > >------------------- Carey Smith Moorman, Carlinville, IL > >A helium tank is actually a vacuum of sorts, one that sucks the >heaviness out of things. So when a helium tank is connected to a >balloon, it's merely removing the heaviness from the balloon. The >law of Conservation of Energy and Mass demands that heaviness go >somewhere, and it goes into the tank. When you return the tank to >the chemical supply shop, they sell that heaviness to record >companies where it is used to give substance to popular music. >People who handle such heaviness must wear rubber gloves, because >absorbing heaviness through the skin can result in depression, a >natural consequence of working with popular culture in any form. > -------====< Entropy Eventually Wins >====--------- Eric Harnden (Ronin) (202)885-2746 ... harnden@physics.american.edu ---===< And I Like To Be On The Winning Side >===--- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:10:11 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Ben Cox Subject: Re: microtonality via midi In-Reply-To: <32FB2A4B.2A04@interseg.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" M. Nail writes: > while we're on the topic of microtonality, is there a way to do this via > midi? I know midi sends note on/off for 12 notes/octave, how do you get > around it? pitch bend messages? I recently bought a JV-880 which has a somewhat inadequate facility for doing alternate tuning: It will let you retune the notes on the keyboard, but it only gives 12 tuning "slots": so you can set up your octave however you want, but the next octave on the keyboard will be tuned the same way. Not too useful for tuning systems with more than 12 notes per octave (but fine for those with <=12). (The DX7II feature Paul Geffen mentioned would be a nice thing to have.) So I've given a certain amount of thought to how it could be done without using the feature. One way (my current favorite) is to set the pitch bend to 1 semitone (giving reasonable resolution), and for each note, choose the equal-tempered note that's closest to the pitch that you actually want and bend it to the right pitch (if you're sequencing, you can set the bend just before the note-on to the exact value you want). This works great for monophonic melodies, but what about alternatively-tuned chords? This is where a multitimbral synth is invaluable: set the same patch on several channels, and bend them independently, with a separate note of the chord on each channel. It chows channels, but the results can be quite nice. Anyway this seems to be getting dangerously close to SYNTH-L territory, so I'll stop here. __ Ben Cox cox@transarc.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 12:04:50 -0400 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peggy Haney Organization: Lima Technical College Subject: Re: unsubscribe I have tried to un-subscribe and it hasn't worked. Please take me off of the list, or tell me how to. Thanks Peg Haney ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 12:26:09 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: mark simon Subject: Re: Arnold's choice Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >Yeah, but you can certainly hear knockoffs of Schoenberg (or, for that >matter, Penderecki) in things like film scores, but then that just >reinforces a stereotypical association of perceived dissonance with >terror, insanity, etc. > >Hmm...insanity on the one hand, academia on the other, poor Arnold just >don't stand a chance... Which brings up another point, which is that you have no control over how people interpret the emotional content of what you write. No matter what Schoenberg's intentions were, he knew darn well that he was living in a society that associates major 7ths and minor 2nds with tension, and perfect 5ths with calm. He should have known that by upping the M7/m2 content of his scores, downplaying the P5th content and forbidding octaves altogether, he was going to come up with music that people would inevitably associate with terror and insanity. Furthermore, he lived in a place and time (turn of the century Vienna) that glorified the expression of angst and extreme states of emotional tension. I think he developed his style to match the general Zeitgeist. His opera "Erwartung", written to his own libretto, is nothing if not an explicit representation of terror and insanity (a woman wanders through a dark forest uttering broken and hysterical phrases, eventually stumbling onto the body of the lover she's just killed). But assuming that later in his career he wished to express something more moderate (the early 12 tone pieces like the Wind Quintet and Serenade can seem downright jolly to me if I'm in the right mood) he was limited in the way he could put these other moods across, given that his compositional system dictated a high level of angst-associated intervals. The humor in his Wind Quintet and Serenade come mainly from the perkiness of the rhythm. I should also say that not every Schoenbergian I know of hears these pieces as particularly perky. **** I believe that music-making requires 3 agents: a composing agent, a performing agent, and a listening agent. The composing agent may consist of a single person (Schoenberg for instance) or more than one person (often the case in jazz, for instance). The performing agent consists more often than not of several people, and in the case of electronic music it may only consist of your particular gear. (and in jazz there's likely to be considerable overlap between composng and performing agents). The third element, the listener(s), is just as important. It's the listeners who process all the information from the composing and performing agents and decides what it all means. Only the listening agent, the audience can make the decision about what the music is expressing, whether that music is universal or personal in significance, how it relates to their lives and their society. If the audience's decision differs from the composer's intentions, there's not a lot the composer can do, EXCEPT: learn to anticipate what kind of meaning the audience is likely to impose on the sounds you're creating and use that knowledge to manipulate the audience into reacting the way you want them to. In other words, it's the composer's job to say "this is how I feel. What can I do to make the listeners feel this way too?" Of course in between the composer and the listener are the performers, whose job it is to say "this is what I feel the composer felt. What can I do to make the listeners feel this way too?" Sometimes performers feel the composer is feeling something the composer didn't actually feel (which, depending on the quality of the performer, can be perfectly alright). So the composer has the added duty of anticipating what the performer might do and saying "this is how I feel. How can I get the performer to feel the same way, so that the audience in turn can feel the same way?" Given this 3-way chain of communication, I think music has to have a certain level of univerality. If music is entirely personal in meaning, then the communication from composer to performer to audience breaks down. But since there's such a wide variation among people, true universality is never really a possiblity. This mythical professor we've been discussing might have also stated that "without the tension between the personal and the universal, there could be no art". There may be some truth to this. Does anybody have an opinion? > >But again a major light bulb went off in my head when a reviewer described >some of Part's 12-tone clusters ion one of the symphonies) as "festive" >and I suddenly understood (and heard) what he meant. > ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Mark G. Simon Music cataloger Central Tech. Services Cornell University Libraries mgs2@cornell.edu ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 09:31:00 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU Subject: Re: Alternative scales and tunings Comments: To: lpaul@TIAC.NET Charles Ives (I think it was) wrote some microtonal music for two pianos tuned a quarter tone apart. Does anyone know of a recording of these pieces? In the most recent Schwann Opus there is a listing of only one recording: G.Bouwhuis & C. van Zeeland, pianists. It is on Channel Classics (CCS 4592). I haven't heard this recording, but I love those three pieces (I have the old recording on Columbia Oddyssy vinyl) If you can get it, try a recent CD of Ivor Darreg called "Detwelvulate". Like the Blackwood, the music sounds pretty conservative in most ways, except the tuning. Darreg also uses many different tempered tuning systems. Speaking of microtonalists - the current Schwann Opus's cover story article is an interview with Lou Harrison, on of the bigwigs in ggetting western composers interested in alternate tunings. There's also articles on Colin McPhee, one of the first ethnomusicoligists to really study the music of Bali (he was also a composition student of Varese!) and an article on the influance of Balinese and other Indonesian Gamelan on the music of Debussy. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:44:58 -0800 Reply-To: jefff@dgii.com Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Jeff Fried Organization: digi international Subject: Re: microtonality via midi MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit M. Nail wrote: > > while we're on the topic of microtonality, is there a way to do this via > midi? I know midi sends note on/off for 12 notes/octave, how do you get > around it? pitch bend messages? what about for *really* dumb midi > synths? Pitchbend will work with a few limitations: 1. You need some way to control, for example, software that intercepts a key on message, looks up what pitchbend info should be applied, then sends the pitchbend info followed by the key on. (Alternatively, you could do it manually, but you've then you've got to be able to pre-hear the scale in question). 2. Pitchbend controls all the notes on a channel, thus the amount of polyphony is equal to the multi-timbrality of the synth (how many channels of midi you synth can receive and sound simultaneously). 3. Most modern synths have 14 bits of pitchbend info which is plenty. Some of the older ones only have 7 bits which isn't quite enough. Alternatively, you could use a software synthesis system like csound which allows you to use any tuning you like. Csound has midi so you could program it to receive midi key on info and then map it to a note of the microscale. However, you need a very fast machine to do this in real time. -- Jeff. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 14:38:11 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: "Robert M. Sanders" Subject: Re: Arnold's choice -Reply Mark Simon writes: < I believe that music-making requires 3 agents: a composing agent, a performing agent, and a listening agent. ... Given this 3-way chain of communication, I think music has to have a certain level of univerality. If music is entirely personal in meaning, then the communication from composer to performer to audience breaks down. But since there's such a wide variation among people, true universality is never really a possiblity. < BINGO! Give the man a cigar! ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 15:23:18 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Crandall Subject: Re: The Art Discussion (1) In-Reply-To: <32FAA39A.6C7D@mail.rbdc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 6 Feb 1997, Terry Leigh Britton wrote: > David Rodger wrote: > > > > Terry just told us about the Species of Portia > > (or perhaps he was just relaying information). Anway, this spider... > > > > > lure their victims with signals made by plucking, drumming, shaking, etc., on > > > the webs. Portiauses a wide variety of ploys to capture its prey, including > > > apparent imitation o > > > f insect struggle patterns as well as imitation of one heterogeneric mating signal, > > > > etc. > > > > Mike, maybe this is the controller you've been looking for. ;-) > > > > Regards, David > > musdr@lure.latrobe.edu.au > > http://farben.latrobe.edu.au/d_rodger/ > > > > Hah! So, now it's a race to see who can get their postcards to the > patent offices first with the world's one and only original WEB > CONTROLLER! > > (actually a viable idea...eh?) :) Actually, maybe so, using Very Nervous System or some very sensitive pickups. The trick would be ensuring Ms. Portia's presence, not to mention appetite. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 10:14:39 -0800 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Mike Metlay ++ Atomic City Subject: Re: Are the subjects still debateable? In-Reply-To: <32FAE87F.3F6A@dk-online.dk> from "DEVOTION" at Feb 7, 97 09:31:59 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit DEVOTION writes-- > >I'm thinking of how much money I've "wasted" on the art- and techo >discussions on this list lately. > >I joined this list to discus electronic music (i.e. keyboards, samplers, >use of sequencers and so), and I didn't expect it to be a list where 90% >of the mail would discuss philosophical thoughts about music. What, another one? God in a bucket, doesn't ANYONE read the damn intro message? Saying you didn't expect EMUSIC-L to be about musical philosophy is like saying you didn't expect a cooking with rat poison would make food that would kill you! Musical philosophy is what this list is all about, it's what it was created for, and it's what people talk about here. Saying you didn't expect it indicates that you haven't a clue what this list is all about. From your usual posts and tone, I would gather that you actually DON'T want to talk about electronic music at all. What you appear to want to talk about is electronic musical INSTRUMENTS.... the tools, not the task. And that's okay; in fact, there's an entire list devoted just to that, our sister list SYNTH-L. I know you're signed up there; why not make use of it, and leave the foggy-minded philosophical chatter to those of us who enjoy such things? BTW, crossposts to EMUSIC-L and SYNTH-L are usually not justified, and crossposts talking about how kewl some new toy is are definitely not justified. Learn the rules before you start complaining about how the game is played. mike (yet again the bad cop) -- mike metlay * atomic city | = atomic@netcom.com = | NEWS FROM ATOMIC CITY: John 0 welcomes 1997.... info line: 1-800-924-atom | cd orders--> po box 81175 | "Hey, it's been five years, right? pittsburgh, pa 15217-0675 | Silence ends." or via the worldwide web: | http://pd.net/atomic-city | or phone _lofty pursuits_ | (Be afraid. Be *very* afraid.) toll free: 1-800-548-6724 | ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 17:30:00 -0500 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: David Crandall Subject: MIDI System sw Comments: To: Max list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII (Apologies to those who get duplicates of this. On my mailreader, the correct key is "D") Now that I have my shiny new 7600 at home, I'm going round again on the question of the best setup in terms of MIDI drivers, etc. for use with Max, Deck and an to-be-determined new MIDI sequencer (still using MidiPaint, for Pete's sake!!), as well as ultimately ProTools/DAE PowerMix. So once again: Is there an information resource, article, whatever out there that discusses the ins and outs of combining MidiMangler/Patchbay vs OMS vs MidiShare, FreeMidi, whatever (including known extension conflicts since I also use the machine for graphics and authoring)? I'll also now need to ship QuickTime time code around as well as MTC, so I need to get up on understanding that. I posted this question a couple of years back when I had to set up a machine at school and got no replies, so I assume there were no resources available. Any updates? Basically I'm trying to figure out a way to get back the kind of data-handling I used to get with my Jambox (which I'm not using since nothing but MidiPaint will talk to it anymore). All replies, (war stories, bibliographic cites, etc.) are welcome, including direct email replies. BTW, I'm also kicking around the idea of a Midi Time Piece AV versus one of the new MOTU ones with SMPTE, which I don't know much about yet. Thanks in advance, David Crandall dcrand1@umbc.edu ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 03:19:38 +0100 Reply-To: Electronic Music Discussion List Sender: Electronic Music Discussion List From: Paulo Mouat Subject: Re: Alternative scales and tunings MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter_Mueller@UCSDLIBRARY.UCSD.EDU wrote: > > Charles Ives (I think it was) wrote some microtonal music for two > pianos tuned a quarter tone apart. Does anyone know of a recording of > these pieces? I have those pieces on Wergo WER 60112-50, 'Charles Ives - Piano Pieces' performed by Herbert Henck and Deborah Richards. -- __|__ ___\_/___ ___ Paulo Mouat, |___| mouat@mail.telepac.pt |___|