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

Re: [microsound] audio software environments



and to answer the rest of your poll:
On Oct 11, 2004, at 10:20 PM, Michael Wright wrote:
Does audio software that requires high levels of user input produce musically more valuable results than those that require little?

Generally, yes. Isn't this the case with all instruments, however? Are you sure you are asking the right question here?


Do you favour speed of result over being closer to the machines language?

Definitely. I love Reason and Live and use them when appropriate. I can write Squarepusher-y amen mash ups in Reason faster than I can believe. It's also good for sketching out melodies and song structures. Appropriate tools for appropriate jobs.


Understand however that the more time one spends with a piece of software the faster their are at using it. I know people who are lightning fast at writing complex beats with trackers like octamed and fasttracker. And with programs like Max/MSP, Supercollider, and Reaktor, one accumulates a large array of re-usable piece of code, macros and patches that are utilized where appropriate over and over again.

I suspect however that you are too freely intermingling the ideas of composition and tool/instrument/fx creation.

At what point does ownership stop and become more of a collaboration between the user and the software programmer? Would you ever release a record that was created using e-jay, playstation music 2000 or garageband?

What does Garage Band have to do with those other products? It's a multitrack recorder, a dumbed down version of Logic Audio. It's extremely useful when one doesn't have access to protools or logic. The loops etc are just window dressing. I use Garage Band as a four-track regularly, although nowadays I use Live 4 for this. I also used to make hardcore gabber by hacking audio files into Rebirth's resource fork. Does that answer your question?


At the other end of the scale, when does it start to become something that's more to with computers than music?

CSound? I kid, I kid.

I do suspect that there is a tool-creation vs composition/performance split that you are really interested in, rather than necessarily music vs computer.

In my opinion many computer musicians that program their own software environments seem to produce music that doesn't justify the time and effort it takes to create such programs (i.e. why create a granular tool in msp when run of the mill audio software or freeware can do much the same only better sounding and in far less time?).

I'd disagree, but then again I'm a fan of autechre, hrvatski, tetsu inoue, etc. I'd recommend reading the more historical chapters in Curtis Roads' book Microsound. The easy availability of granular tools is, historically speaking, very recent. Remember that 10 years ago there was no Reaktor or AudioMulch. And the only reason that some of these sounds are available in popular audio software is because they were popularized by Aphex Twin, Oval, Autechre, all of whom have either made their own software or had others make stuff for them.



Do you think computer musicians are trying to widen the gap between the tools they use and that of the mainstream media?

There is a certain aura to the use of Max/MSP etc that makes it hip or attractive, but I think that "computer musicians" are mostly just trying to do new and personal things with computers. Also, the way popular electronic music (dance, techno, jungle, what-have-you), any new sound or fx gets it's obvious uses beaten into the ground within a couple years at best.


I've ended up diving into Max/MSP out of sheer necessity; it is a much more intimate creation environment than anything else I've previously used, and the kinds of sounds I want to make are a very hard sell commercially and thus are not catered to by the mainstream software companies. So I'm making my own tools and instruments, to use along side those that I've bought that I like, and to manipulate audio I create.


In general i'd like to find out how much of peoples music is a consequence of the software they use? Are any of you proud to have a certain softwares sound in the same way people are proud to use a 909, 303 etc?

The music you make is almost always some kind of collaboration with the tools you use to make it or the instruments it will be played on. "There's nothing you can sing that can't be sung." It's just that with computer music and techno, it's a bit more obvious. There is also a definite stigma attached to certain products. Buzz, Reason, Live, Fruity Loops seem to be really disrespected in some circles, but are in fact in use by some really talented, experimental musicians.


On the other hand, there's a fair number of folks who lust for a kyma even if they've never seen one in person.

it's late and my brain is melting, hopefully some of this was of some use.

Anthony


--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx website: http://www.microsound.org