Even more on performance

[William Tsun-Yuk Hsu <hsu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From: "jonah dempcy" <jdempcy@xxxxxxxx>

>but next i ventured to argue not only that computers (specifically
>laptops running playback or preset sequences) are less "live" than other
>instruments (electronic or acoustic) that require "hands on" playing, but
>also that they are much more limiting to the musician performing.

If you're just refering to rigid sequencing, sure. Later:

>computers don't even allow you to _acknowledge_ these type of things.

Again, if you're just refering to rigid sequencing, sure.
But if we're talking about "playing" computers in realtime,
in general...

>say for example that the band you are playing with is shuffling time between
>6/8 and 4/4 spontaneously, how do you keep up with the computer?

In an interlocking rhythm with the drummer, I trigger short
percussive sounds with the computer keyboard; the sounds are
actually scratchy bits of soundfiles looping through granular 
synthesis modules and have a variety of attacks.

>or the bass & drums vamp on an infectious 3 over 4 feeling for a build, how
>do you change your sequence to compliment this, and then change back at the
>next bar? 

I skip the sequence (not hard; I never sequence in performance :-)),
switch to my electric guitar feedback MSP patch for a screeching solo. 
Nuanced control using the mousepad.

I used to play piano in performance, almost exclusively. In certain
situations, I found that to be too limiting. But I do go back to
the piano for more jazz-y settings. Some instruments (computer
included) work better in some situations.

Bill