Re: [microsound] maths science and electronic music

[Peter Price <pprice@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>
>
> This is a very important point, one that i feel i was trying to 
> insinuate in the beggining. I noticed alot of people were intimating 
> that their work could not be seperated from the process. Someone 
> referenced Xenakis, saying that they could not appreciate his music 
> without visualising the mathematical prcesses behind it.
>
> I would like to suggest that this is because Xenakis makes bad music.


I would suggest this is a comment of very limited value...


>
> It always confounds me how idm talk so much about their materials, its 
> like they are afraid to admit that what they are attempting to do is 
> make art because then we can judge it as such. I mean when was the 
> last time you heard Matthew Barney going on about his film stock. Or 
> for that matter, when was the last time you heard Autechre going on 
> about the importance of their max patches in the appreciation of their 
> music.
>


" The Cremaster Cycle was all shot on video, but the footage is 
transferred to 35mm film stock for projection. Cremaster 4 was shot on 
BETA SP, Cremaster 1 and 5 were shot on Digital BetaCam, Cremaster 2 
was shot on HDTV, and Cremaster 3 was shot on 24P HDTV, a format that 
records video at 24 frames per second, the same speed that film is shot 
and projected."

and Autechre on max patches and other tech stuff

http://www.littledetroit.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2453