Re: [microsound] Re: Alternative performance devices

[Simon Hampson <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I've been reading in and out of this thread/the laptop performance one... 
mostly because of a lack of time...

>this is part of what makes the old electroacoustic stuff stand out as more
>interesting. the primitive technology meant you had to work real hands-on.
>today when everybody is using the same sophisticated software the software
>controls the composer more than the other way round (i.e. lack of
>expression) and it makes everything sound somewhat alike and bland.
>
>all this force the artist/composer into seeking novelties (or worse, rely on
>new versions of the software) to stand out rather than developing a skill.
>
>i think ;=)

i strongly disagree with this viewpoint. I believe that computer-based 
performance does not box the artist in to a corner or make them follow a 
certain line. I believe that, just like 'real' instruments it is all about 
parameters. It is just more apparent when a performer is 'playing' an 
instrument in front of you what parameters or sound source they are 
manipulating.

eg. There was a post before about preferring laptop artists who use a 
mixing desk to control output.. perhaps because there is that visual 
knowledge of them 'doing' something.

Does this desire to 'know' the inner workings of a performance come from 
the fact that so many of us are creating art ourselves? It has been 
mentioned before that much of the audience for electroacoustic and 
microsound works are composers themselves.

Finally, I think that a strong component of computer-based works is the 
source materials... ie. whether a piece is based on field recordings, 
samples of other works etc... I'll leave that one to float in the email aether.

cheers,

Simon.

Symbiosis
Sunday nights 12am - 2am
102.7 FM Melbourne, Australia
www.rrr.org.au

info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

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