Re: [microsound] building blocks

[David Powers <dpowers3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Derek,

I appreciate your perspective greatly.  But I might add that I AM a
composer... that's the thing... I've been composing for years already. 
Also I've been playing piano and improvising (first jazz, later more
experimental/atonal improv) for 18 years.  And some of the pre-packaged
software lets me use the composition knowledge and performance skills I
already have.  If I know what I want to achieve as a composer/performer,
and there is a tool already available that lets me achieve it, why not
use it.  Sometimes I don't want to "throw out" all this learning but
just want the computer to help me achieve something more efficiently. 
There is a place for pre-packaged solutions.  It all depends on what
problem as a composer or musician you are confronting.

I mean, I still write scores (or edit MIDI files generated elsewhere)
with Finale for acoustic instruments, PD is not going to replace that
(though maybe some other open source software will).  It is not as if
Finale dictates what kind of music I must write with it.  If I open up a
soundfile with an audio editor, any audio editor, there are a pretty
wide range of things I could do with the editor, from mundane to
brilliant.  It may not be technologically innovative, but it still could
be aesthetically interesting!

The only reason I started using computers with music in the beginning
was:
1.  To write down scores for acoustic instruments quicker and hear my
ideas before I set them in front of the instrumentalists
2.  To try to record and/or mix down audio without needing to pay for
expensive studio time that I could not afford.

It was only later after I was working with computers that I began
realizing that I could explore many more aspects of music with them, and
I began to be interested in directly manipulating sound and using
computers more substantially.  I mean, I'm a person that used to use
DICE along with my own tables and charts to write aleatoric music, I
come from a much more "old school" approach originally (sometimes I
still do it this way).

I can still use a pen and paper to write some good and interesting
music, after all.  It's my mind that is the key element.  Can I write
microsound that way - I think not - but I bet I could write some
interesting music that had a similar character and a related aesthetic
to microsound.  Lately I've been thinking about using a "micro" approach
to dissecting jazz music, tearing apart transcriptions of bebop lines,
extracting little elements to make something like sound clouds, but
using traditional instruments and a big band to do it.

Overall, I have to say, not that you are wrong exactly, but that I
think you should make your point a little more narrowly.  It's not
always bad to have an efficient, pre-packaged computing solution to a
particular problem.  Just because I'm learning PD shouldn't mean I can't
still write other kinds of music that utilize my 18 years experience of
composing and performing.  Not everyone who makes good art is a computer
expert (though I hope to be that also someday).  Perhaps your critique
applies better to certain genres of computer music creation, but not as
a general statement.

~David

>>> derek@xxxxxxx 04/07/05 02:20PM >>>
David Powers wrote:

> I can't wait 3-4 years to be an expert at this way of making music!

I'd say that for making music for your own enjoyment--computer
punkrock, 
digital folkmusic, bedroom DJing, whatever--this is perfectly valid.
But 
for music that you would present as innovative in a public forum, 3-4 
years of learning is nothing. How long does a violinist or pianist 
study? Or a composer, who has to understand all the instruments they
score?

This is the myth that is most fascinating about "creative" software: 
that it allows one to instantly and easily make art. "Easy to use" is 
often made possible by a strong default style hardcoded into the 
structure of the software, and your "original" instant results are 
usually filtered entirely through the artistic visions and tastes of
the 
software's creators.

I'd recommend those interested in a critique of this kind of software,

which responds very much to market pressure for certain musical styles

and for products which allow the average user to feel very empowered,
to 
have a look at Signwave's AutoIllustrator software.

AutoIllustrator began its life as a piece of "software art"; i.e. a
work 
of art in the form of software made to address issues around the 
consumption/use of software itself. AutoIllustrator looks very much
like 
an Adobe product of brand-name recognition. But it has a mind of its 
own, and any attempt to make "your" art with it results in it making
its 
own lines and shapes regardless of your input. There are various menus

and toggles, such as a slider between "stupid" and "pointless", or 
"bugs" which crawl around leaving vector-based track marks all over
your 
canvas. But the best button of all is the button which is labelled "I
am 
incapable". In the end that is what much of this fancy consumer-grade 
software is telling you: that you are incapable of doing it yourself 
without that software. Let us do it for you. And it's in their best 
commercial interest that you believe this.

These kind of algorithmic instant results made AutoIllustrator very 
popular with lazy graphic designers, however, and soon they were
selling 
lots of licenses and even plugins. One was a plugin which generated 
three dimensional "architectural" shards which could be exported as an

EPS file and used in a "normal" vector editor. I saw these shards pop
up 
on websites and CD covers for about 6 months, which is about as long as

any gimmick in the graphic design world lasts anyway before they all 
move on to the next hype. Remember the "Flash wobble"?

In short, the reason I spent the time that I did learning how to work 
with PD and other kinds of open environments was that I didn't want to

feel like I was trapped in someone else's idea of how to make music.
And 
more than that, I felt that the tools I use to make art shouldn't reply

on consumer marketing trends, "user friendliness" or how well they 
imitate expensive or rare pieces of music hardware from other eras in 
order to ensure their development and lasting support. For me it was 
about freedom from all that, and I don't regret a moment spent "not 
creating" so I could learn.

d.

-- 
derek holzer ::: http://www.umatic.nl 
---Oblique Strategy # 105:
"Listen to the quiet voice"

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


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