Re: software synthesizers : disappointment?

[Derek Holzer <republikasleazka@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----Original Message Follows----
From: Bill Jarboe <billjarboe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I was a bit disappointed when you wrote that you use 'Reaktor' live, since
you are one of my three favorite electronic composers and that seems a bit
obvious( I guess as long as it sounds ok. . . ).

0)))))))))))

does this mean we have to go over the relative [de]merits of Reaktor till 
the cows come home now, too? i'm inclined to see it as another visual 
programming language, like MAX, and a bit less 'obvious' than you think, 
especially if you are trying to think outside the dance-music box.

regardless, inspiration lies far away from the GUI. this mystique that we 
all have to program our own software, build our own hardware, recite our own 
code backwards and dream up our own patches in our sleep (well, three out of 
four ain't bad!) does seem to hide our own artistic intentions behind a veil 
of techno-babble. talk to many folks working in the technological arts, and 
get them to de-mystify a 'trade secret' or two--their gimmicks--if you will. 
9 times out of 10, you will end up 'a bit disappointed'.

likewise, if your conception is muddled and your execution ham-fisted, all 
the digital smoke, mirrors and delays can't hide it.

just my thoughts to a [multiple] thread which just won't die. thanks for 
reading and have a good week.

derek

http://acoustic.space.re-lab.net/lab

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com