Re: [microsound] Re: livecoding

[mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

Whoa! Gimme a break!!

This series of reactions to my post reflect a clear distance between
cultures and experiences on "praxis".

First of all I couldnt care less about US politics since I live on the
other side of the world. On this side of the world, we don't have
intellectual-class-packed technocratic festivals full of hundreds of
people with university level mindframe.

We have to deal with what we have, and to prove I'm not just a whiner, I
can tell you that if you are making computer music round here, the only
way to take your work into public dominion is to have some kind of "show"
mounted. Forget about acusmatic listening, 5.1 sound installations,
government commissions, and off course dont even dare to try to sell your
CD, and even less to sell software.

Economically, its all loss and no gain for sure. Thats where I'm speaking
from. Forgive my imperative statments, but there's a BIG part of the
e-music community that doesnt enjoy "plenty of room for other
possibilities". Children in most countries of the world couldnt possibly
relate even to a computer keyboard.

Electronic artists in general have a hard time around here (unless we
chose to stay locked in a room for the rest of our artistic life). We are
middle class intellectuals like most of the posters in microsound, but we
ARE constrained when it comes to artistic production. This is why I was
proposing a more socialist approach to an e-music performance, not so
technocratic, a way to adress people who dont even know what is code, and
maybe even never saw a laptop other than on TV.

Apart form this, I think its pretty clear that everything I write IS my
personal opinion. Except perhaps that e-music live enactment topic where I
-was- sure everybody would agree. Al forums keep discussing that onstaging
problem since internet went on. I maybe wrong about that, and yet, I
wonder where all those VJs came from??

Forgive me again if Im being too defensive, but its time that some people
recognised that there is a huge world full of artists also interested in
technology, that dont necessarily share the same resources as the
"originals". One good proof of this is that I cant even understand all of
the complex language in your response, since Im not an english native
speaker.


Hernan

www.cooptrol.com


>> Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 08:34:13 -0700 (PDT)
>> To: microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> From: mail@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [microsound] livecoding
>> Message-ID:
>> <1903.200.125.57.222.1152113653.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Visual live enactment of electronic music is a must nowadays. We
>> all agree
>> on that. Available technology is more than enough for this purpose,
>> and
>> its not so expensive either, so there are no excuses.
>
> Here's that pesky problem with language that doesn't properly
> bracket statements of value with statements of opinion - it's an
> entirely arguable proposition. At the very least. The original poster
> doesn't speak for me. As is the case in any situation where one
> makes artistic decisions, there is plenty of room fo other
> possibilities,
> and polemic here is, I think unhelpful [given the current political
> situation in the U.S. where all kinds of folks appear interested in
> moralizing and marginalizing others by couching statements of
> belief or opinion as inarguable propositions, perhaps I may be
> a bit oversensitive....].
>>
>> I ve seen the live coding videos, and it seems to me that there's
>> still a
>> gap between the code on the screen and the sounds emerging from the
>> speakers. There's no way ordinary public can relate each code event to
>> each sound. The live coders claim that there's no need to know how
>> to play
>> a guitar to enjoy a guitar performance. But they forget that when
>> we watch
>> "real world instruments" performances, there are constant synchresis
>> points (Michel Chion). You may not be a guitarist but you clearly
>> understand a string striking movement as the source of a sudden
>> sound with
>> a short attack time.
>> The same goes for the drums, and almost any other traditional
>> instruments.
>> Even piano, where the keyboard may not be in the audience's sight
>> range,
>> admits clear synchresis interpretation, watching the arm movements.
>> And,
>> like piano, all this instruments and their mechanisms are intuitively
>> understood by virtually any human being.
>
> Oh. Michel Chion. I personally much prefer Rick Altman's
> Sound Theory/Sound Practice, but perhaps I'm not sufficiently
> worshipful of phenomenology in general. And, while I like
> graeco-latin high-register terminology as much as the next
> person (as any student of Greek and Latin in secondary school
> would probably be), I find his terminology cumbersone,
> personally. I prefer sticking closer to Cognitive Science, and
> would therefore find Joseph Anderson's writing more salutary.
>
> In any case, I'm generally uneasy with having theorists tell me
> what I should do. Praxis rules.
>
>
>> That's why we as electronic musicians, should generate visuals (if not
>> with our bodies) that permit a natural synchresis between sounds and
>> visual forms. "Hey that sphere over there has just trembled in
>> reaction to
>> that rough sound!" This is what I mean. Understandable audiovisual
>> forms,
>> and complex (or not)compositions/improvisations.
>
> There's that *should* again. We've done all that hard work to free
> ourselves of such associations and now we go banging new ones
> together? Sorry, I prefer to have that remain a choice.
>
>>
>> Besides, I agree with some people who posted on that Wired article,
>> when
>> they recognise a very elitist attitude in this group of live
>> coders. The
>> same elitism I experience every time I'm stuck in a blatant
>> conversation
>> between two programmers about C++ or else.
>
> One great way to avoid elitism is to argue one's case rather
> than asserting it, and to eschew the use of normative language
> if one has another alternative. It's inefficient, and occasionally
> troublesome to discover that there are people who don't see
> what is blatantly obvious to me, but hey.
>
>>
>> And last but not least, we should develop music tools fun to play
>> with, to
>> integrate people to our musical world, even if they need training
>> to make
>> "proper" music with them. A child can get sounds from a guitar, but I
>> seriously doubt he can make any music with Perl.
>
> Logo and LISP can do quite a lot rather early on, actually. Perhaps
> you could be liberated from your doubts.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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