[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] fan reaction to laptop



> > I've never had good reception to a laptop set.  Turntables have brought a
> > little more interest, but not much. 

Interesting point, would it be that the performer changes posture and is
seen making a 1:1 manipulation of a device? If thats true would perhaps
a laptop performer's screen if projected have a similar effect if they
are actually manipulating sound live (sort of defeats a possible
illusion though of course if they are just playing back tracks though)

And/or is it perhaps that they are including a sizable amount of already
"accepted" and refrencable material into their set.

> dont know how your music sounds but you need not worry. in general
> noise/microsound etc. seem to have the same problem as electroacoustic
> music.
> 
> i.e. no-one likes to listen to the stuff outside a very small circle of
> mostly other composers. a book by tom wolfe comes to mind - "the painted
> word" ;=)

I somewhat agree here in that I think myself there are 2 issues. One is
that the sonic language being used too often isn't accessible on
multiple levels. Too often perhaps the point even is to create something
that speaks to only a smallish group of well acclimatized people. There
is a certain satisfaction perhaps that it doesn't get through to the
uninitiated.  I don't mean to say the goal is to make music that must be
liked and or understood by everyone, but I can't say I'm for music that
pushes the listener away or screens the listener rather than tries to
draw one in.

The second issue I think can happen is the performer/composer takes it
as a given that the satisfaction and surprises of working with an
interactive interface  automatically conveys that enjoyment to the
people listening. In other words the act of doing/putting together the
music personally generates a thrill that has little correlation to the
listening experience of others. Its important to have the opportunity to
get a reaction to untested works and methods, on the other hand
sometimes the satisfaction of suspecting and  finding out something
works after the fact is maybe a more lasting audience friendly goal than
perhaps a jam of some length no matter how fun the tweaking experience
at the time may have been  

> 
> personally I no longer think this type of music can hack it alone unless it
> has some novelty value. but everything has been done and nothing new has
> surfaced in this area since the 60s. 

I take it your heroes/influences had to have been based in the 60s. I
see no real differentiation of the above statement if substituting the
50s or 90s.

I'm not sure how it correlates to your arguement but I guess there was a
unique popular culture window in the 60s where the very new and
different was actually embraced to some extent. People get frusterated
that today that window seems fairly closed and may be becomming moreso
dispite relatively greater infusion of technology. 

>it works best as backdrop/complement to
> other stuff. you need to combine with words, video, "real music" or
> something else.

Okay, fair enough. I read what I think is the same situation of actually
an issue of being compelling to others. If one has more media going on
I'd say the odds are higher that something in there might be compelling.
And even better, if the goal is to have them interract as they should
be, and they do with success then that in itself is quite compelling.

> I've never had good reception to a laptop set. 

> (Of course, it could also be that I usually work with the best soundman 
> in Cleveland, and 120 dB for a full set is not out of the question when 
> one works with Ralph.)

Certainly technical considerations eventually have a real bearing on the
success of a performance. Certainly I wouldn't delude myself as that is
all the answer. Saying that would eventually lead one to deduce that
your own work may have little bearing, perhaps the delivered sound makes
everyone sound acceptly good regardless of the content ;-) 

> and one of the points they always plug 
> is stage presence-- putting on a show rather than just sort of being up 
> there.

agreed as the goal being discussed seems to be one of performance

> i think most part of the people do this with naive intentions, they really
> dont understand if the guy behind the computer is setting up, has started or
> he's just there, like a security or something. are people afraid that
> they're being joked?

Yes, though I think this should just be a problem performers should be
aware of and should do something fix themselves. Being prepared somehow
for someone who doesn't get it or is frusterated can't hurt either.

I see some side concerns here too. To reduce boredom I guess its pretty
common for a venue to play canned music between sets. That material is
pretty deadly if its a lot more interesting than the live act (and real
trouble in my mind if the live act doesn't seem to be very live performancewise).

I think your stuff being "together" for the presentation is important
for a lot of things. I think an audience probably has more good will for
an act who's stuff is together, comes on and does their thing. The
patience diminishes when there is a long period of fiddling and sound
checking before something happens, an act almost has their bar raised to
be appreciated if they set up or delay for a long time with a waiting audience.

> 
> Would there be any interest from the laptop players in an instrument-like
> laptop configuration?  One that could be played while moving about - a bit
> like Roy Wooten's Drumitar? (see
> http://www.jazzconnectionmag.com/Futureman%20Concert%20Pic.jpg  )  Has
> anyone ever done a gig with something like this?

> Would there be any interest from the laptop players in an instrument-like
> laptop configuration?  One that could be played while moving about - a bit
> like Roy Wooten's Drumitar? (see
> http://www.jazzconnectionmag.com/Futureman%20Concert%20Pic.jpg  )  Has
> anyone ever done a gig with something like this?

I would think the performer's technique could be visually emphasized by
that. The danger of course is if the audience feels they could be
playing "better" if they were using something else.

For what its worth a friend of mine has been using a Yamaha Miburi data
suit for years. Its always something to see though I guess use it more
for a highlight than keep it going on song after song.

>  My partner and I
> made a straight up disco house song that turned into a wall of noise right
> when the beat was supposed to drop.  The crowd went nuts.  After we caught
> their attention people actually listened for a little bit.

After a lot of the "same" being quite different is always commendable.
Though perhaps some people mistakenly think somehow they are
"different", there is something that rubs me personally the wrong way
when someone has to actually remind a listener of that.

> I was once asked at a party what exactly was I doing when spinning
> records.  The guy asked me if I was making the sounds.  I just loooked at
> him blankly for a second and then told him that I was playing records.  He
> asked me again if I was 'making the sounds'  I pointed to a turntable and
> said I am playing that record.  He didn't get it.  Is the new generation
> completely unaware of the existence of vinyl?

I would theorize that person has a lot of musician friends and is trying
to tick you off. 

nicholas d. kent
http://www.artskool.biz/jem/ndkent/

------------------------------