RE: [microsound] tools vs. aesthetics?

[bobby whn <golf_dragon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

i think also that using an instrument or software which you have built 
yourself brings you closer to the sounds which you obtain from it, and also 
that not only these sounds, but the way in which you aproach them is much 
more likely to be unique. perhaps the difference is that instead of the 
person changing or being trained to fit the instrument, the instrument is 
created and shaped to fit the person,  however if something is custom made 
to fit you in the present tense then there may be no room for exploration of 
new ground which you didnt forsee at the time of designing the device. you 
can be in a stiuation where you build a tool for a specific task and then 
move on, but i would rather have access to a single 'instrument' which i can 
be in control of at times, but not know the limits of , so that i am not 
bound by these limits.  i think that if you are designing 'tools' to fulfill 
your requirements then you have to be very sure of your own intentions and 
goals sylistically, which is difficult if you are also aiming to challenge 
your own ideas and conventions rather than follow a single idea to its 
conclusion. (my problem is that i have spent many hundreds of hours trying 
to develop this 'instrument' and comparatively few hours making music with 
it!)

>From: andrew benson <cloudmachine99@xxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: microsound <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [microsound] tools vs. aesthetics?
>Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 11:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
>
>While I agree that it's good to check the gear-talk
>once in awhile, I feel that it is vital to discuss and
>consider our tools as an integral part of our
>aesthetic.  The beauty of working with digital sound
>for me is the accessibility of building custom tools
>that will do new and unique things.  This is very
>difficult to do with acoustic instruments.  The fact
>that this puts added responsibility on the composer
>only forces the composer to refine and perfect the
>whole system.  This has been the case in the visual
>arts for centuries.  As a painter, I never really
>understood pigment until I started mixing my own
>paints with raw materials.  Many ceramicists mine
>their own clay and build their own kilns.  The laptop
>has allowed musicians and composers to have a more
>holistic approach to sound and composition.
>
>IMHO, electronic music tends to lack an awareness of
>the tools that goes beyond self-reflexive digital
>discourse.  Programs like Pd, Max, SC, etc. allow for
>a greater awareness of the molecular aspects of sound.
>    It seems Live is a very popular tool because it
>fits with many people's aesthetics, or is just the
>most convenient answer.
>
>Andrew Benson
>www.cloud-machine.com
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>website: http://www.microsound.org
>

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/


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