Re: [microsound] Performing "Live"

[jason urick <themoonstealingproject@xxxxxxxxx>]

> 
> ya I agree with that.  BUT I don't think I'd find
> four guys jumping around
> in front of theremins to be any more entertaining
> than four guys jumping
> around with guitars.

i agree. i just used the rock band as the most
identifiable example.


> But I figure any animated
> antics that happen on stage
> is for the benefit of the performer, to keep himself
> interested, and if he's
> interested he's more likely to keep me interested
> with the music.

mmmmmm.... but isn't alot of it just empty gesturing?
like, i hit this chord then i jump! 

is a guitarist who is running all about making faces
while bending notes necessarily more interested in his
own music than one sitting expressionless on a stool?

> As a
> performer I'd prefer using a guitar or a theremin
> over a laptop running one
> of those modular DSP programs.   Guitar or theremin
> is a far more expressive
> controller.  I particularly dislike the 'cable'
> patching you have to do in
> programs like Audiomulch and Reaktor (never seen MSP
> but I assume its
> similar).  Modular synthesizers with patch cords
> were never all that
> expressive but at least they made sense on a
> physical level.  

it all depends on what you are trying to "express".
for you guitar and  theremin might be how you are best
able to express yourself. to me a drone can be as
"expressive" as a guitar solo or improvised sax
blurts. just because your gestures aren't as overt as
changing chords rapidly doesn't mean you are being any
less expressive. i personally find attention to tiny
details in a larger sound to be an exhilarating
listening experience. artists like tony conrad, terry
riley, la monte young, phil niblock and the like have
created some of the most affecting music i have ever
heard within the parameters of a drone.  




> But patching
> cables on a screen with a mouse is painful.  You
> have to click just the
> right tiny spot to connect a cable from one module
> to another, and its not
> always obvious which are inputs and which are
> outputs.  I also find turning
> 'virtual knobs' with a mouse to be a pain, whereas
> moving 'virtual sliders'
> with a mouse is not bad at all.

well that's a downfall agreed. as for knobs, you
purchase midi controllers such as the phatboy to do
away with that.


> 
> I find it hard to believe that anyone is using these
> programs as
> improvisationally as claimed, in a live situation. 
> Setting up a bunch of
> patches before hand, then controlling them with
> knobs on an external
> controller is a pretty good idea, just like prepping
> a sampler with a bunch
> of samples for a performance.  Or, even hitting play
> on your DAT machine
> (and hey if you can turn it off and on via midi, you
> can even set up an
> 'environment' for it in Logic!). 

the sounds your guitar can make are preordained before
you play as well. it's all what you do with it.


> But if anyone
> expects me to believe that
> they get any enjoyment, or even decent results out
> of  making new modules
> and patching them together with little lines on the
> screen while managing to
> keep anyone entertained, well.. I'd have to see it
> to believe it.

i don't know what to tell you other than i do.


> Judging
> from the various DSP debates and the recent contact
> mic debate, I'm inclined
> to believe there are more illusionists than
> magicians in this field.

as with any other field. but isn't magic just illusion
anyways?

j


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/