[microsound] live vs memorex

[Kim Cascone <kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> All of these reasons (which by the way, seem so terribly obvious 
> that=20
> I'm left wondering about the motives of your questions) contributed 
> to=20=
well for one thing I don't use Live or ACID in either a live or studio 
environment (although I have used both of them in the past for small 
projects) but more importantly I am not necessarily looking for posts 
that answer my question so much as reveal the underlying cause of the 
problem...
so far I think the answer is that the marketing and packaging (and all 
the attendant abstractions of desire this implies) condition people to 
adopt a tool for a particular usage; it is not adopted by forming a 
well informed opinion...
while your A/B comparison list is very helpful I see nothing listed on 
it that would preclude one from using ACID as a live performance 
instrument...
I think the posts w/r/t my question make a point when it comes to how 
software marketing dept's determine the constraints of an audio tool...
your logic seems to be as follows: 'the package didn't say someone 
could use ACID to play live' so it was not used in that manner...if 
this were the case then why did many artists perform live with Pro 
Tools, Sound Editor, GranuLab, Soundhack, etc. when laptop performances 
starting becoming more commonplace in the late 90's? these were also 
considered 'studio tools' and not 'live performance instruments' yet 
that didn't prevent people from using them in that manner...is 
Ableton's market penetration so deep because it says on the box that 
you can use Live for performing live?
I think the distinction between the two (i.e., 'live performance 
instrument' vs studio 'tool') is really a manipulation of perception or 
how a marketing dept spins a product...
what it boils down to is this: if people learn to solve their own 
problems by gathering information they can ween themselves from the 
mediating layer of marketing hype which habitually shapes how people 
see/desire and use a product...
one of the nice things about audio FLOSS is that it usually doesn't 
rely on marketing hype to sell itself and people are encouraged 
download and experiment with it to see if it fits their needs...there 
is no artificial layer of value added to a product; the product is what 
the software does...

> Have we become obsessed with our
> tools to the detriment of our aesthetics?
we shape the tools and then they shape us...
I see no difference between my tools and my work/aesthetics...they are 
not separate and to think they are is seeing each with distinct 
boundaries instead of a holistic process; a system in which all the 
parts create one another...the tool informs the music as much as the 
music informs the tool; it is one smooth surface from which the music 
emerges; there is no difference to me between researching something on 
say, projective geometry or sitting down to creat the patch in Max/MSP 
or performing the piece live to hard drive...its all part of the same 
system...


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