Re: [microsound] Intellectual Property

[Michal <mis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 03 Oct 2000, alex@xxxxxxxx wrote:


> > although I am more than willing to share some ideas on an abstract
> > level I tend to be rather guarded when it comes to the details...I
> > like knowing the general concept of an artists work and guessing as to
> > how it was implemented...
> 
> Well there is value in that, but personally I get frustrated with
> conceptual art where I am not provided with the concepts, and feel
> similarly about experimental music (which may also be conceptual art).
> 

What happened to the old and good ability to analyse music (or art in
general)???


> 
> I wasn't trying to suggest that laptop performances are inherently bad,
> just that I, selfishly, want to see more of what is going on..  Did the
> audience see their screens?  If not, do you think they'd have benefited
> equally from your experience?  As a programmer and generative musician I
> live in processes throughout the day.  I find it almost unbearable to be
> denied access to them in leisure.
> 
> I like to know whether a musician is using software they have written
> themselves, how they are interacting with it, how much is 'live'..  These
> things dramatically change the way I experience a performance, how I
> relate to it as a human.

Have you ever seen a "magic" show?  How much would you appreciate it if you
knew all the tricks the illusionist is doing?  You know that he's tricking you
but you're not always sure how.  I think that a composer/performer is that kind
of a magician.  Creativity is one thing but the secret of your craft is
another.  On another hand, not all experimental music is written/performed for
musicians only.  I know a bunch of people who like to listen to experimental
music and they have no idea about music making or use of computers in music. 
So they don't give a s**t about what programs and in what way they guy is using
or what kind of playing technique or whatever.  All they want to hear is good
music.  

Also, I don't quite get this mid-20th century idea about a composer having to
talk about his music for 40 minutes before the concert (or on
radio/university/younamit to make his "concept" well understood.  Yes, it is
important to be aware of certain cultural, perhaps
political,industrial,philosophical,[...fill in other ideas...] situation in the
world/country/state/city/street/individual in order to better understand the
work but (IMHO) this will be transparent enough throughout a number of works. 
And as an ensemble they will shed some light on various aspects of the
"process".  When I know know in advance what "technique" or "process" a
particular composer is using I usually have a listen to 1-3 of his pieces and
that is more than enough...  unless of course those piece are substantially
different or don't use quite the same process (or if the ideas are treaded
_musically_ rather than processed....)....


I think I got carried away... a bit...


MiS

BTW.  I admit that I am not familiar with Oval's music.  But I do hope that his
process is not really a process....