From renato.fabbri at gmail.com Tue Dec 1 11:28:41 2009 From: renato.fabbri at gmail.com (Renato Fabbri) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:28:41 -0200 Subject: [microsound] registering volume modulation In-Reply-To: <4B12DE64.8060006@gmail.com> References: <1f50cb500911291227h287ef0a2g1e3a34b682a1cdc8@mail.gmail.com> <4B12DE64.8060006@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1f50cb500912010828w61874315o655990421c26f92c@mail.gmail.com> > Most people cannot hear frequencies below 20hz, so any harmonic component > lower than 20hz is heard as volume change rather than a part of the timbre. Really? I would not be so sure, like, your chin or nose trembling at 5Hz doesnt make any sound at all to me, why would it add volume to another sound happening at the same time? > > 1/20*1000 gives 50 --- 50 ms or longer chunks should probably work. RMS > will tell you more about the sound's perceived amplitude than peak will. > For extra credit you could do an fft and figure out the sone level for > the sound (the sone scale is weighted for human perceptual nonlinearities - > the frequencies that we hear best add more to the score). > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From info at aevox.be Tue Dec 1 11:53:36 2009 From: info at aevox.be (Info ( Aevox )) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 17:53:36 +0100 Subject: [microsound] registering volume modulation In-Reply-To: <1f50cb500912010828w61874315o655990421c26f92c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002401ca72a6$d3749150$6601a8c0@celeron3ghz> slow presure variations (weather changes, low rumble) will are not longer percevale as audio (trough the ear). E.g. the tube of Eustachius will open to release the pressure difference between the outer and middle ear. If not, the tension on the membrane will become to big. (in negative or positive sense) -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: microsound-bounces at or8.net [mailto:microsound-bounces at or8.net] Namens Renato Fabbri Verzonden: dinsdag 1 december 2009 17:29 Aan: microsound at microsound.org Onderwerp: Re: [microsound] registering volume modulation > Most people cannot hear frequencies below 20hz, so any harmonic component > lower than 20hz is heard as volume change rather than a part of the timbre. Really? I would not be so sure, like, your chin or nose trembling at 5Hz doesnt make any sound at all to me, why would it add volume to another sound happening at the same time? > > 1/20*1000 gives 50 --- 50 ms or longer chunks should probably work. RMS > will tell you more about the sound's perceived amplitude than peak will. > For extra credit you could do an fft and figure out the sone level for > the sound (the sone scale is weighted for human perceptual nonlinearities - > the frequencies that we hear best add more to the score). > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From andrewchristophersmith at gmail.com Tue Dec 1 14:46:01 2009 From: andrewchristophersmith at gmail.com (Andrew C. Smith) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:46:01 -0500 Subject: [microsound] registering volume modulation In-Reply-To: <002401ca72a6$d3749150$6601a8c0@celeron3ghz> References: <1f50cb500912010828w61874315o655990421c26f92c@mail.gmail.com> <002401ca72a6$d3749150$6601a8c0@celeron3ghz> Message-ID: > Really? I would not be so sure, like, your chin or nose trembling at > 5Hz doesnt make any sound at all to me, why would it add volume to > another sound happening at the same time? I think what we're saying here is that a 15 Hz signal added to a 300 Hz signal will be perceived as a 300 Hz tone with a 15 Hz tremolo effect. It's not a matter of "hearing" so much as perception. To look at your original question, though, I would say to experiment with the voice and especially to look at compression techniques. One large problem you might run into is how a plosive will often register as 100%. People on the SC list were talking about this, using weighted averages over the last few frames to figure it out. One good technique might be to take an FFT snapshot and just use the power of the 500-2500 Hz region, since that's where the vowels will be. I remember this being suggested somewhere, and the person seemed pleased with the result. Good luck. Andrew On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Info ( Aevox ) wrote: > slow presure variations (weather changes, low rumble) will are not longer > percevale as audio (trough the ear). E.g. the tube of Eustachius will open > to release the pressure difference between the outer and middle ear. If not, > the tension on the membrane will become to big. (in negative or positive > sense) > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: microsound-bounces at or8.net [mailto:microsound-bounces at or8.net] Namens > Renato Fabbri > Verzonden: dinsdag 1 december 2009 17:29 > Aan: microsound at microsound.org > Onderwerp: Re: [microsound] registering volume modulation > >> Most people cannot hear frequencies below 20hz, so any harmonic component >> lower than 20hz is heard as volume change rather than a part of the > timbre. > > Really? I would not be so sure, like, your chin or nose trembling at > 5Hz doesnt make any sound at all to me, why would it add volume to > another sound happening at the same time? > >> >> 1/20*1000 gives 50 --- 50 ms or longer chunks should probably work. RMS >> will tell you more about the sound's perceived amplitude than peak will. >> For extra credit you could do an fft and figure out the sone level for >> the sound (the sone scale is weighted for human perceptual nonlinearities > - >> the frequencies that we hear best add more to the score). >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From benreviug at yahoo.com Sun Dec 6 09:33:55 2009 From: benreviug at yahoo.com (guiver ben) Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 06:33:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [microsound] help required with non-detection of emagic MT4 midi interface by logic in os 9 In-Reply-To: <20090928100025.754FD606865@ws1-4.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <753726.63724.qm@web52008.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Dear Microsounders, hello. i am sorry to hassle with this problem, but need help... basically, i use an old version of logic audio platinum (4.8) together with my g4 quicksilver, audiowerk sound card and a MT4 midi interface (usb), in os9. it used to work fine, still does really (stays in patch mode when the mac is powered up...), but the problem is that the software isnt picking it up and hence i cant get any midi into or out of logic. (and the light doesnt change from patch to usb/software mode). i did reinstall both os X (10.4) and os 9 recently due to heavy drive corruption requiring a reformat. i installed OMS for the free version of pro-tools, but have removed all traces of this from the drive, fearing this might be getting in the way or something. if anyone knows what might be wrong, i'd be very very glad to hear from them since i cant really use any of my midiable gear right now, and thats a massive downer..... all the best ben guiver From js0000 at gmail.com Mon Dec 7 14:59:50 2009 From: js0000 at gmail.com (john saylor) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 14:59:50 -0500 Subject: [microsound] noteworthy 2009 music Message-ID: hey i thought i would put out the call for end of year best lists. for myself i have next to nothing. i liked the supercollider 140 char [tweet] collection. also spent time with terry riley's in c, looking at realizations both for chuck and csound. otherwise a flurry of work [software] and a forced move [apt building sold] and a motorcycle accident and the beginnings of a mediatation practice kept me otherwise occupied. -- From brymoxine at yahoo.com Tue Dec 8 01:17:40 2009 From: brymoxine at yahoo.com (bryan garcia) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 22:17:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [microsound] noteworthy 2009 music In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <373928.22371.qm@web33105.mail.mud.yahoo.com> hope this can aid you while you recover from the accident - http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/02/0081387 i laid down my 1972 honda on a highway in houston a long time ago. i had just bought a jimi hendrix box set, and it was in my back back. after sliding about thirty feet on my back and almost into the car in front of me i was thankful for being conscious.? next thought was the box set.?? tore through the cover of the jewel case? but the c.d.'s and i were ok. ? my mom came and picked me up. best --- On Mon, 12/7/09, john saylor wrote: From: john saylor Subject: [microsound] noteworthy 2009 music To: "microsound list" Date: Monday, December 7, 2009, 1:59 PM hey i thought i would put out the call for end of year best lists. for myself i have next to nothing. i liked the supercollider 140 char [tweet] collection. also spent time with terry riley's in c, looking at realizations both for chuck and csound. otherwise a flurry of work [software] and a forced move [apt building sold] and a motorcycle accident and the beginnings of a mediatation practice kept me otherwise occupied. -- _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnnydixon at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 03:50:33 2009 From: johnnydixon at gmail.com (Johnny Dixon) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 08:50:33 +0000 Subject: [microsound] noteworthy 2009 music In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <85f22e4d0912080050l53098f18l972ec31c0cedc97c@mail.gmail.com> Is mediatation a new artistic discipline, or a sub category of microsound.? If not, I think it should be. 2009/12/7 john saylor > hey > > i thought i would put out the call for end of year best lists. > > for myself i have next to nothing. i liked the supercollider 140 char > [tweet] collection. also spent time with terry riley's in c, looking > at realizations both for chuck and csound. > > otherwise a flurry of work [software] and a forced move [apt building > sold] and a motorcycle accident and the beginnings of a mediatation > practice kept me otherwise occupied. > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- j -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From macdara at email.com Sat Dec 12 16:24:25 2009 From: macdara at email.com (macdara at email.com) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:24:25 -0500 Subject: [microsound] VHF in pop Message-ID: <8CC49889D4175A7-E84-1918@web-mmc-m09.sysops.aol.com> Does anyone know of a particular reason why very high frequencies (on edge of my hearing anyway) would be used in commercial pop music, there were these sounds being used rhythmically in a shopping centre the other day and I'm wondering are there specific psychoacoustic reasons because it seemed like they were very deliberately being blasted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noisesmith at gmail.com Sat Dec 12 16:34:06 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 13:34:06 -0800 Subject: [microsound] VHF in pop In-Reply-To: <8CC49889D4175A7-E84-1918@web-mmc-m09.sysops.aol.com> References: <8CC49889D4175A7-E84-1918@web-mmc-m09.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <4B240C4E.6060006@gmail.com> It could be coincidental or unrelated, but some shopkeepers broadcast VHF tones designed to be inaudible to adults but irritating to teenagers, to keep kids from loitering. I also heard of kids appropriating the tone as a way of being alerted to text messages in class in a way inaudible to their teachers. http://www.noloitering.ca/ macdara at email.com wrote: > Does anyone know of a particular reason why very high frequencies (on edge of my hearing anyway) would be used in commercial pop music, there were these sounds being used rhythmically in a shopping centre the other day and I'm wondering are there specific psychoacoustic reasons because it seemed like they were very deliberately being blasted. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From milan.lists at gmail.com Sun Dec 13 15:27:38 2009 From: milan.lists at gmail.com (Milan Davidovic) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:27:38 -0500 Subject: [microsound] Web fora, mailing lists for music industry small biz Message-ID: <98b2fdd50912131227tf25bdadxfae91117ef2e1e7e@mail.gmail.com> Hi all, Are there Web fora or mailing lists where small business operators in the music industry go and exchange information and advice, tell stories, etc.? My Google results so far aren't turning up much (which perhaps says more about me than anything else). Thanks. -- Milan Davidovic http://altmilan.blogspot.com From gshapley at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 07:10:01 2009 From: gshapley at gmail.com (Greg Shapley) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:10:01 +1100 Subject: [microsound] post-digital and minimalism Message-ID: <951a77c60912150410q4f77b739gad63bee7e8dffbe2@mail.gmail.com> I'm interested in hearing from theorists and practitioners who have something to say about music minimalism (both big 'M' minimalism - Young/Riley/Reich/Glass etc. and more marginal types) and its relationship to post-digital sound. I'm considering editing a book on this subject and would like to hear from potential authors. Cheers, Greg Shapley From kim at anechoicmedia.com Tue Dec 15 12:38:24 2009 From: kim at anechoicmedia.com (Kim Cascone) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:38:24 -0800 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? Message-ID: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new music one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians the other is the death of laptop music interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and .microsound From milan.lists at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 12:45:16 2009 From: milan.lists at gmail.com (Milan Davidovic) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:45:16 -0500 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <98b2fdd50912150945k33b76e52x1a7cafccce3185b0@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new > music > one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians > the other is the death of laptop music If laptop music is dying, is it being supplanted by something else? Or is the context changing in such a way as to lead to its demise? Me, I've been puttering at home all along, and have missed the laptop party altogether. -- Milan Davidovic http://altmilan.blogspot.com From lastnightsofparis at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 12:45:47 2009 From: lastnightsofparis at gmail.com (David Eng) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:45:47 -0800 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: I've noticed a heavy hybridization occuring, in the sense that more musicians are using MIDI controllers & analogue instruments as a way of bringing back a certain physicality to performance. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Kim Cascone wrote: > over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new > music > one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians > the other is the death of laptop music > > interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and > .microsound > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lastnightsofparis at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 12:45:47 2009 From: lastnightsofparis at gmail.com (David Eng) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:45:47 -0800 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: I've noticed a heavy hybridization occuring, in the sense that more musicians are using MIDI controllers & analogue instruments as a way of bringing back a certain physicality to performance. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Kim Cascone wrote: > over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new > music > one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians > the other is the death of laptop music > > interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and > .microsound > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thomas_bethmont at msn.com Tue Dec 15 12:46:34 2009 From: thomas_bethmont at msn.com (thomas_bethmont at msn.com) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 09:46:34 -0800 Subject: [microsound] =?iso-8859-1?q?R=E9ponse_en_cas_d=27absence?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ted.houghtaling at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 12:58:19 2009 From: ted.houghtaling at gmail.com (ted houghtaling) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 12:58:19 -0500 Subject: [microsound] (microsound) VHF in pop Message-ID: <30e45e280912150958w5a098027ia45a80e3da3456ac@mail.gmail.com> hello, new to the forum. was pondering vhf in pop more in the context of extraterrestrial soundings. ie: shortwave recordings of stellar phenomena, like this: http://www.m-1.us/m4m_Perseid_meteor_shower_Radio_Waves.mp3 listening to this, i find it is not unlike an average philip jeck or tim hecker recording. and listening to the latest releases by animal collective, black dice, who seem to be spearheading the future of ambient texture in popular music, are very high frequencies going to be a vital resource for young musicians to appropriate? -ted houghtaling ted.houghtaling.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From the.apx at libero.it Tue Dec 15 13:27:25 2009 From: the.apx at libero.it (Adern X) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:27:25 +0100 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing realtime manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with other (real?) instruments. The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. Hi! Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: > over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments > in new music > one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians > the other is the death of laptop music > > interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music > culture and .microsound > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound Adern X http://www.xevor.net http://www.myspace.com/adernx "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From grahammiller at sympatico.ca Tue Dec 15 13:45:11 2009 From: grahammiller at sympatico.ca (Graham Miller) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:45:11 -0500 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <6103890D-8D9C-4488-B203-7871D48CC554@sympatico.ca> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: > IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music > generator to the state of a music controller. In other words, if > some times ago laptop music used mostly sinewaves as input, now it > seems more interesting doing realtime manipulation of samples (or > somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with other (real?) > instruments. > The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, > for me, music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. > > Hi! > > Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: > >> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting >> developments in new music >> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >> the other is the death of laptop music >> >> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music >> culture and .microsound >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > Adern X > > http://www.xevor.net > http://www.myspace.com/adernx > "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) > > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From list at isjtar.org Tue Dec 15 13:46:42 2009 From: list at isjtar.org (isjtar) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:46:42 +0100 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <4B27D992.5060907@isjtar.org> interesting.personally i see many evolutions, from the mainstreaming of Ableton Live as a sequencing instrument, the broad acceptance of live fx on acoustic instruments, the incorporation of homemade and factory controllers. also large and small touch screens everywhere - which i don't think is the great next evolutionary step. anyway at my org we are looking at using embedded devices to make computers specific to music. like hardware, but more flexible like a controller, but without the need for a computer like a laptop, but not necessarily with screen, keyboard and mouse i really think custom computers tailored to your idea of a musical instrument can be quite powerful. adern, with sinewave music you mean synthesis in general? isjtar http://okno.be Adern X wrote: > IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator > to the state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago > laptop music used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more > interesting doing realtime manipulation of samples (or somenting > coming from audio inputs) or play with other (real?) instruments. > The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for > me, music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. > > Hi! > > Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: > >> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments >> in new music >> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >> the other is the death of laptop music >> >> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music >> culture and .microsound >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > Adern X > > http://www.xevor.net > http://www.myspace.com/adernx > "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From pangea_100 at yahoo.com Tue Dec 15 14:24:48 2009 From: pangea_100 at yahoo.com (juan antonio nieto arroyo) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:24:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B27D992.5060907@isjtar.org> Message-ID: <207185.21243.qm@web58902.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Indeed, in recent years, the use of laptops in live acts has been criticized for its statism and lack of spectacle. I must say that some of the best concerts I've attended have been interpreted by "static" musicians, mainly pianists and laptop artists, those I could barely see their heads. Nobody questions to Francisco Lopez by blindfolding the audience to their shows, unlike everyone seems "cool" We have taken years bucked the ethics and aesthetics of rock and pop music to somehow try to retrace our steps. I think that's a mistake. Personally, when I go to a concert, what interests me is not likely to be catching the "show" but concepts so out of fashion as the creativity and talent, and I don?t mind the instrument they play. The fact about depreciate the laptop as a musical instrument, is nothing more than a fad, and like all fads, passing. ? Soon we will read in microsound the decline of contact microphones and effects units ... so physical. --- El mar 15-dic-09, isjtar escribi?: De: isjtar Asunto: Re: [microsound] post-laptop era? A: microsound at microsound.org Fecha: martes, 15 diciembre, 2009, 7:46 pm interesting.personally i see many evolutions, from the mainstreaming of Ableton Live as a sequencing instrument,? the broad acceptance of live fx on acoustic instruments, the incorporation of homemade and factory controllers. also large and small touch screens everywhere - which i don't think is the great next evolutionary step. anyway at my org we are looking at using embedded devices to make computers specific to music. like hardware, but more flexible like a controller, but without the need for a computer like a laptop, but not necessarily with screen, keyboard and mouse i really think custom computers tailored to your idea of a musical instrument can be quite powerful. adern, with sinewave music you mean synthesis in general? isjtar http://okno.be Adern X wrote: > IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator > to the state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago > laptop music used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more > interesting doing realtime manipulation of samples (or somenting > coming from audio inputs) or play with other (real?) instruments. > The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for > me, music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. > > Hi! > > Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: > >> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments >> in new music >> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >> the other is the death of laptop music >> >> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music >> culture and .microsound >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > Adern X > > http://www.xevor.net > http://www.myspace.com/adernx > "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >??? _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound ____________________________________________________________________________________ ?Obt?n la mejor experiencia en la web! Descarga gratis el nuevo Internet Explorer 8. http://downloads.yahoo.com/ieak8/?l=e1 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cyborgk at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 15:00:59 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:00:59 -0600 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <6103890D-8D9C-4488-B203-7871D48CC554@sympatico.ca> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> <6103890D-8D9C-4488-B203-7871D48CC554@sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might say so, even rather "amateurish". However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is it just a simple pastiche of the two. In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the society of controlled consumption. If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. ~David On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller wrote: > the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... > > On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: > > IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the > state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music > used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing realtime > manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with > other (real?) instruments. > The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, > music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. > Hi! > Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: > > over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new > music > one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians > the other is the death of laptop music > > interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and > .microsound > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > Adern X > http://www.xevor.net > http://www.myspace.com/adernx > "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > From the.apx at libero.it Tue Dec 15 14:50:45 2009 From: the.apx at libero.it (Adern X) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 20:50:45 +0100 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B27D992.5060907@isjtar.org> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> <4B27D992.5060907@isjtar.org> Message-ID: Yes! In some ways i think synthesis and concrete music is in some sort of opposition. A.X Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 19:46, isjtar ha scritto: > interesting.personally i see many evolutions, from the mainstreaming > of > Ableton Live as a sequencing instrument, the broad acceptance of live > fx on acoustic instruments, the incorporation of homemade and factory > controllers. also large and small touch screens everywhere - which i > don't think is the great next evolutionary step. > anyway at my org we are looking at using embedded devices to make > computers specific to music. > like hardware, but more flexible > like a controller, but without the need for a computer > like a laptop, but not necessarily with screen, keyboard and mouse > i really think custom computers tailored to your idea of a musical > instrument can be quite powerful. > > adern, with sinewave music you mean synthesis in general? > > isjtar > > http://okno.be > > Adern X wrote: >> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator >> to the state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago >> laptop music used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more >> interesting doing realtime manipulation of samples (or somenting >> coming from audio inputs) or play with other (real?) instruments. >> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for >> me, music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >> >> Hi! >> >> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >> >>> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments >>> in new music >>> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >>> the other is the death of laptop music >>> >>> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music >>> culture and .microsound >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> Adern X >> >> http://www.xevor.net >> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound Adern X http://www.xevor.net http://www.myspace.com/adernx "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From the.apx at libero.it Tue Dec 15 15:09:15 2009 From: the.apx at libero.it (Adern X) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:09:15 +0100 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> <6103890D-8D9C-4488-B203-7871D48CC554@sympatico.ca> <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <027ABD13-047B-40F2-9AD3-B418BCF9032C@libero.it> I almost agree, it's not really important the surface or the hmi. It's important if there's some sort of thought behind the music. The controller help if it's important for the structure, it helps some gesture. Sometimes the controller is ... "everyone can now make music". Hi, A.X Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 21:00, David Powers ha scritto: > Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. > > To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives > me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such > an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological > obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any > new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is > difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is > possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range > of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might > say so, even rather "amateurish". > > However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result > of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much > important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great > musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian > classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European > classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a > huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and > possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, > leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering > the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, > if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. > > The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel > dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; > it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the > inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference > between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's > saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a > sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner > structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, > Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's > recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up > the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One > might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in > Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an > empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, > the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a > distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with > the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order > to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something > which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is > it just a simple pastiche of the two. > > In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere > progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under > the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event > rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities > for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it > is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress > remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the > society of controlled consumption. > > If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps > it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid > of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we > can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of > the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the > accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. > > ~David > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller > wrote: >> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... >> >> On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: >> >> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music >> generator to the >> state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago >> laptop music >> used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing >> realtime >> manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or >> play with >> other (real?) instruments. >> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, >> for me, >> music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >> Hi! >> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >> >> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments >> in new >> music >> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >> the other is the death of laptop music >> >> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music >> culture and >> .microsound >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> Adern X >> http://www.xevor.net >> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound Adern X http://www.xevor.net http://www.myspace.com/adernx "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kim at anechoicmedia.com Tue Dec 15 16:30:36 2009 From: kim at anechoicmedia.com (Kim Cascone) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:30:36 -0800 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> I have an idea headcount please? then I'll explain From mnelson2 at wisc.edu Tue Dec 15 16:34:58 2009 From: mnelson2 at wisc.edu (MSC Nelson) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:34:58 -0600 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: I think that the laptop will stay at the core as a processor that computes, but that controllers other than the keyboard are being used more, especially in live performance. Another interesting thing is when the laptop becomes the agent of two people, where one manipulates the sonic signal (futzes with the sine wave, in simple terms) and sound space while the other shapes and triggers it with a controller like a guitar or another keyboard. Recently saw a great opening act performance by a solo tuba-ist who used the tuba as a controller and only occasionally mixed in the acoustic signal of the tuba, using only digitally generated sounds. He used the laptop for processing, as well as the keyboard for triggering, but most of his control was with the tuba. Another laptop trend that falls outside of the traditional musician's focus on acoustic elements is the integration of visuals triggered using the same controllers as the sounds. This really changes the feeling of performances, including the use of live video. This is especially a hot topic in art performance, where people often have at least as much interest in the visual rather than sonic part of the performance. What is an even more interesting development to me is that there is a "popular" audience for laptop-"experimental" music. Granted, I live in a university town, but the concert that included the tuba-ist was attended by over 500 people, and last week I attended a small venue laptop code-manipulated concert performance during a snow storm with an audience of over 50 people. Perhaps the plethora of musicians is a response to an enlarged audience, which at the same time might indicate laptop's movement to the mainstream and its death (or at least geriatricization) as an experimental form. Mark M.S.C. Nelson Associate Professor Design Studies Department University of Wisconsin-Madison Room 235 1300 Linden Drive Madison, WI 53706 608-261-1003 mnelson2 at wisc.edu -----Original Message----- From: microsound-bounces at or8.net [mailto:microsound-bounces at or8.net] On Behalf Of Kim Cascone Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 11:38 AM To: microsound_list Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new music one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians the other is the death of laptop music interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and .microsound _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From stevericksmusic at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 16:46:35 2009 From: stevericksmusic at gmail.com (Steven Ricks) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:46:35 -0700 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <7a0414350912151346s486bb50al24450c0005048759@mail.gmail.com> What is "laptop music"? What constitutes its death? On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Kim Cascone wrote: > over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new > music > one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians > the other is the death of laptop music > > interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and > .microsound > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- Steven Ricks Composer Associate Professor, BYU School of Music (801) 422-6115 www.stevericks.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From traktorman at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 16:50:45 2009 From: traktorman at gmail.com (tkrakowiak) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:50:45 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: 1 2009/12/15 Kim Cascone > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From erik at thuisbasis.net Tue Dec 15 16:55:36 2009 From: erik at thuisbasis.net (Erik Maes) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:55:36 +0100 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <4B2805D8.3020600@thuisbasis.net> Interested? Why certainly. Groet, Erik Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From ted.pallas at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 16:55:30 2009 From: ted.pallas at gmail.com (Ted Pallas) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:55:30 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <8c1eb1cf0912151355t7775e68ej20d1ff8a9877c461@mail.gmail.com> 2 Ted Pallas Live Media Designer ://grove.nyc, founder http://grovenyc.net ted dot pallas -at- gmail dot com 516.286.9661 On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:50 PM, tkrakowiak wrote: > 1 > > 2009/12/15 Kim Cascone > > I have an idea >> headcount please? >> then I'll explain >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From christopherjette at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 16:58:20 2009 From: christopherjette at gmail.com (christopher jette) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:58:20 -0800 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <18b394640912151358y31803693tb302db9fa004afc0@mail.gmail.com> *3.14159265* On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- www.cj.lovelyweather.com christopherjette at gmail.com 617.869.3968 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From christopherjette at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 16:58:20 2009 From: christopherjette at gmail.com (christopher jette) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:58:20 -0800 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <18b394640912151358y31803693tb302db9fa004afc0@mail.gmail.com> *3.14159265* On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- www.cj.lovelyweather.com christopherjette at gmail.com 617.869.3968 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From erikdeluca at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 16:58:04 2009 From: erikdeluca at gmail.com (Erik DeLuca) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:58:04 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <8c1eb1cf0912151355t7775e68ej20d1ff8a9877c461@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> <8c1eb1cf0912151355t7775e68ej20d1ff8a9877c461@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <491ea0280912151358u580d5d50y91ee0110d3dc85bd@mail.gmail.com> 3 On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Ted Pallas wrote: > 2 > > Ted Pallas > Live Media Designer > ://grove.nyc, founder > http://grovenyc.net > ted dot pallas -at- gmail dot com > 516.286.9661 > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:50 PM, tkrakowiak wrote: >> >> 1 >> >> 2009/12/15 Kim Cascone >>> >>> I have an idea >>> headcount please? >>> then I'll explain >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -- erikdeluca.com From rlainhart at otownmedia.com Tue Dec 15 16:59:32 2009 From: rlainhart at otownmedia.com (Richard Lainhart) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:59:32 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: I'm interested, whatever it is. > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound Richard Lainhart http://www.otownmedia.com http://www.downloadplatform.com/richard_lainhart http://www.vimeo.com/rlainhart http://www.youtube.com/rlainhart http://richardlainhart.bandcamp.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha_roberts at hotmail.co.uk Tue Dec 15 17:01:39 2009 From: natasha_roberts at hotmail.co.uk (Natasha Roberts) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:01:39 +0000 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: Hi, I'm in if a relative newbie and quiet one is allowed! > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:30:36 -0800 > From: kim at anechoicmedia.com > To: microsound at or8.net > Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound _________________________________________________________________ Got more than one Hotmail account? Save time by linking them together http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394591/direct/01/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From onds at onds.com Tue Dec 15 17:03:11 2009 From: onds at onds.com (Henry Vega) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:03:11 -0600 (CST) Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: +1 me -- ------------------------------ Henry Vega 271 Dela Reyweg 2571 EG Den Haag +31 6 4780 2313 http://www.henryvega.net http://www.spycollective.com http://www.electronichammer.com ------------------------------ On Tue, 15 Dec 2009, Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From kcpaul at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 17:03:09 2009 From: kcpaul at gmail.com (Kevin Paul) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:03:09 -0700 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <9482DE4E-6879-44C6-B53A-F4025F0FE46C@gmail.com> I'm interested. Kevin Paul On Dec 15, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From ted.houghtaling at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 17:04:59 2009 From: ted.houghtaling at gmail.com (ted houghtaling) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:04:59 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: <30e45e280912151404p72d26574xea110e49ea6a571c@mail.gmail.com> very much interested. -ted houghtaling tedhoughtaling.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vanessa at pervertedlogic.com Tue Dec 15 17:05:26 2009 From: vanessa at pervertedlogic.com (vanessa rossetto) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:05:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <917655.69362.qm@web56303.mail.re3.yahoo.com> i'm interested too --- On Tue, 12/15/09, Kim Cascone wrote: From: Kim Cascone Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? To: "microsound_list" Date: Tuesday, December 15, 2009, 3:30 PM I have an idea headcount please? then I'll explain _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From djdualcore at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 17:06:03 2009 From: djdualcore at gmail.com (Neil Clopton) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:06:03 -0600 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: <535a89520912151406h1d4e471bpafdfc3a16ca7b6dc@mail.gmail.com> Yes. -Neil -- DJ Dual Core's Blog http://oldmixtapes.blogspot.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From auralphyxation at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 17:06:11 2009 From: auralphyxation at gmail.com (emile milgrim) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:06:11 -0800 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <30e45e280912151404p72d26574xea110e49ea6a571c@mail.gmail.com> References: <30e45e280912151404p72d26574xea110e49ea6a571c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: interested indeed. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:04 PM, ted houghtaling wrote: > very much interested. > > -ted houghtaling > tedhoughtaling.blogspot.com > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -- Emile Blair Milgrim www.other-electricities.com www.nicepromo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From list at isjtar.org Tue Dec 15 17:06:01 2009 From: list at isjtar.org (isjtar) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:06:01 +0100 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <7a0414350912151346s486bb50al24450c0005048759@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B27C990.7050507@anechoicmedia.com> <7a0414350912151346s486bb50al24450c0005048759@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B280849.4000206@isjtar.org> as I mentioned before, i'd rather have specialized devices, computers. because for me the problem is not so much the audience, there's no real difference between a laptop or music hardware performance for a public. i also don't think laptops are bad tools. but for me a problem is that they are general purpose and not specific to music or visuals. this means that when working on a piece (from a compositional or instrumental point of view) the general purpose aspect distracts me from music. for example i spend time on wikipedia instead of coding for example. if i would load my supercollider or pd patches in a dedicated machine, i'd free myself of much of that. and while i'm at it, keyboard-screen-mouse is only ideal for live coding. for all other situations i'd rather have a different interface. therefore, to make a nice embedded machine which i can program to serve my needs seems so very nice. you'd still have the advantages of a laptop: portable, custom code, osc communication but not the burden of everyday activities popping up all the time. Steven Ricks wrote: > What is "laptop music"? > > What constitutes its death? > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Kim Cascone > wrote: > > over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting > developments in new music > one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians > the other is the death of laptop music > > interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music > culture and .microsound > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > > -- > Steven Ricks > Composer > Associate Professor, BYU School of Music > (801) 422-6115 > www.stevericks.com > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From roachboy at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 17:07:31 2009 From: roachboy at gmail.com (Stephen Hastings-King) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:07:31 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: References: <30e45e280912151404p72d26574xea110e49ea6a571c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3a5562340912151407m5d0c2901jf3b69eb842d7efc3@mail.gmail.com> i'm interested as well. stephen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From williamsoderberg at comcast.net Tue Dec 15 17:09:18 2009 From: williamsoderberg at comcast.net (williamsoderberg at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:09:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <622615186.1994971260914958119.JavaMail.root@sz0070a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> da si yes etc _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound End of microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 5 ***************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lastnightsofparis at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 17:08:00 2009 From: lastnightsofparis at gmail.com (David Eng) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:08:00 -0800 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: References: <30e45e280912151404p72d26574xea110e49ea6a571c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Sure! Let's do it! On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:06 PM, emile milgrim wrote: > interested indeed. > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 2:04 PM, ted houghtaling < > ted.houghtaling at gmail.com> wrote: > >> very much interested. >> >> -ted houghtaling >> tedhoughtaling.blogspot.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> > > > -- > Emile Blair Milgrim > www.other-electricities.com > www.nicepromo.com > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From williamsoderberg at comcast.net Tue Dec 15 17:09:18 2009 From: williamsoderberg at comcast.net (williamsoderberg at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:09:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <622615186.1994971260914958119.JavaMail.root@sz0070a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net> da si yes etc _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound End of microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 5 ***************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From picnet at urlme.net Tue Dec 15 17:10:39 2009 From: picnet at urlme.net (Mike) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:10:39 +0200 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <76854059-C099-494A-BC6B-7097E0BF315D@urlme.net> The man from delmonte say yes. On Dec 15, 2009, at 11:30 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From gary at meterpool.com Tue Dec 15 17:14:55 2009 From: gary at meterpool.com (Gary R. Weisberg) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:14:55 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <4B280A5F.8000208@meterpool.com> OK, you got my attention - what is it? Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > From herrickalan at yahoo.com Tue Dec 15 17:22:00 2009 From: herrickalan at yahoo.com (Alan Herrick) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:22:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <18b394640912151358y31803693tb302db9fa004afc0@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> <18b394640912151358y31803693tb302db9fa004afc0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <48940.38151.qm@web83604.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> 4 ________________________________ From: christopher jette To: microsound at microsound.org Cc: microsound_list Sent: Tue, December 15, 2009 1:58:20 PM Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? 3.14159265 On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: I have an idea >>headcount please? >>then I'll explain > >>_______________________________________________ >>microsound mailing list >microsound at microsound.org >http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- www.cj.lovelyweather.com christopherjette at gmail.com 617.869.3968 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kim at anechoicmedia.com Tue Dec 15 17:29:05 2009 From: kim at anechoicmedia.com (Kim Cascone) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:29:05 -0800 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** Message-ID: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> .microsound community project: microacoustic music what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using acoustic musical instruments? what is the sound of microacoustic music? let's find out each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music sounds like to them GUIDELINES: - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum - deadline: February 1 2010 - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments with NO processing other than the following: - mixing/layering - editing (cut 'n paste) - slowing down or speeding up - filtering/EQ instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing files should be placed here: http://www.microsound.org/repository/ there is also a link on the microsound.org front page ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update the list (has to be done by hand IIRC) ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken down___ From djdualcore at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 17:38:34 2009 From: djdualcore at gmail.com (Neil Clopton) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:38:34 -0600 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** Message-ID: <535a89520912151438t269ebc27t263afc2791c348f@mail.gmail.com> This is going to be SO much fun! -Neil -- DJ Dual Core's Blog http://oldmixtapes.blogspot.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From matdalgleish at hotmail.com Tue Dec 15 17:41:31 2009 From: matdalgleish at hotmail.com (mat dalgleish) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:41:31 +0000 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: I certainly am... > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:30:36 -0800 > From: kim at anechoicmedia.com > To: microsound at or8.net > Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound _________________________________________________________________ Got more than one Hotmail account? Save time by linking them together http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394591/direct/01/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ilagam at sympatico.ca Tue Dec 15 17:49:34 2009 From: ilagam at sympatico.ca (Magali Babin) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:49:34 -0500 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: i'm interested too,yes! m. myspace.com/magalibabin http://www.electrocd.com/fr/bio/babin_ma/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kim Cascone" To: "microsound_list" Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 5:29 PM Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using > acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music > sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have > ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax > mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended > techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update > the list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken > down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 4690 (20091215) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > From justino at anihilo.com Tue Dec 15 17:53:50 2009 From: justino at anihilo.com (justino at anihilo.com) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:53:50 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: <380-2200912215225350453@M2W128.mail2web.com> Hola Kim, Count me in paz jorge -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web From renato.fabbri at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 18:05:12 2009 From: renato.fabbri at gmail.com (Renato Fabbri) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:05:12 -0200 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <380-2200912215225350453@M2W128.mail2web.com> References: <380-2200912215225350453@M2W128.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <1f50cb500912151505r54613dbdga33c8305141104a2@mail.gmail.com> 5 is my number, couldn't resist it... 2009/12/15 justino at anihilo.com : > Hola Kim, > Count me in > paz > jorge > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- Linux User #479299 skype: fabbri.renato From fdurso at comcast.net Tue Dec 15 18:14:31 2009 From: fdurso at comcast.net (fdurso at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [microsound] microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1229826544.397271260918871108.JavaMail.root@sz0161a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net> I am Frank ----------------------------------- From: Kim Cascone < kim at anechoicmedia.com > To: microsound_list < microsound at or8.net > Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: < 4B27FFFC.10408 at anechoicmedia.com > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed I have an idea headcount please? then I'll explain -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trommer at sympatico.ca Tue Dec 15 18:15:13 2009 From: trommer at sympatico.ca (michael trommer) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:15:13 -0500 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Re. computer with a non-computer interface - it seems to me that most digital gear is exactly that, be it an mpc or one of those 'workstation' keyboards. Re. the loss of musical traditions, I think that many hip-hop/glitch/house/techno artists would disagree - many would argue that the mpc/303/808/909 etc. is/are at the foundation of the style and sound of their music. Sampling as 'merely a sound effect', eh ? Wooh...there's a can of worms you've opened... i'd also be careful about positioning the 'old' 'real' aesthetics of a coltrane against the 'new' - it reminds me of when people were arguing that 'real' music was played on guitars (or whatever) and that anything played on electronic instruments wasn't 'real' music. As a kid it usually boiled down to a drunken argument of zeppelin vs. kraftwerk...stupid. On 12/15/09 3:00 PM, "David Powers" wrote: > Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. > > To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives > me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such > an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological > obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any > new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is > difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is > possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range > of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might > say so, even rather "amateurish". > > However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result > of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much > important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great > musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian > classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European > classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a > huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and > possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, > leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering > the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, > if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. > > The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel > dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; > it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the > inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference > between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's > saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a > sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner > structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, > Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's > recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up > the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One > might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in > Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an > empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, > the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a > distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with > the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order > to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something > which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is > it just a simple pastiche of the two. > > In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere > progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under > the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event > rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities > for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it > is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress > remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the > society of controlled consumption. > > If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps > it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid > of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we > can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of > the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the > accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. > > ~David > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller > wrote: >> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... >> >> On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: >> >> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the >> state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music >> used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing realtime >> manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with >> other (real?) instruments. >> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, >> music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >> Hi! >> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >> >> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new >> music >> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >> the other is the death of laptop music >> >> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and >> .microsound >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> Adern X >> http://www.xevor.net >> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From pereshaped at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 18:20:12 2009 From: pereshaped at gmail.com (Pereshaped) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:20:12 +0000 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: I'm in! 2009/12/15 : > Send microsound mailing list submissions to > ? ? ? ?microsound at or8.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > ? ? ? ?http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > ? ? ? ?microsound-request at or8.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > ? ? ? ?microsound-owner at or8.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of microsound digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > ? 1. Re: ***microacoustic music project*** (Neil Clopton) > ? 2. Re: anyone up for a new project? (mat dalgleish) > ? 3. Re: ***microacoustic music project*** (Magali Babin) > ? 4. Re: anyone up for a new project? (justino at anihilo.com) > ? 5. Re: anyone up for a new project? (Renato Fabbri) > ? 6. Re: microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 6 (fdurso at comcast.net) > ? 7. Re: post-laptop era? (michael trommer) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:38:34 -0600 > From: Neil Clopton > To: microsound at or8.net > Subject: Re: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ?<535a89520912151438t269ebc27t263afc2791c348f at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > This is going to be SO much fun! enthusiasm> > > -Neil > -- > DJ Dual Core's Blog > http://oldmixtapes.blogspot.com/ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:41:31 +0000 > From: mat dalgleish > To: > Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > I certainly am... > > > >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:30:36 -0800 >> From: kim at anechoicmedia.com >> To: microsound at or8.net >> Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? >> >> I have an idea >> headcount please? >> then I'll explain >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > _________________________________________________________________ > Got more than one Hotmail account? Save time by linking them together > ?http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394591/direct/01/ > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:49:34 -0500 > From: "Magali Babin" > To: > Subject: Re: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > ? ? ? ?reply-type=response > > i'm interested too,yes! > m. > > > > > > myspace.com/magalibabin > > http://www.electrocd.com/fr/bio/babin_ma/ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kim Cascone" > To: "microsound_list" > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 5:29 PM > Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** > > >> .microsound community project: microacoustic music >> >> what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? >> is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using >> acoustic musical instruments? >> what is the sound of microacoustic music? >> let's find out >> each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music >> sounds like to them >> >> >> GUIDELINES: >> >> - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum >> >> - deadline: February 1 2010 >> >> - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces >> (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have >> ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! >> content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments >> with NO processing other than the following: >> - mixing/layering >> - editing (cut 'n paste) >> - slowing down or speeding up >> - filtering/EQ >> >> instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax >> mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended >> techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing >> >> files should be placed here: >> >> http://www.microsound.org/repository/ >> >> there is also a link on the microsound.org front page >> >> ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files >> >> the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers >> >> if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update >> the list >> (has to be done by hand IIRC) >> >> ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken >> down___ >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> >> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus >> signature database 4690 (20091215) __________ >> >> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. >> >> http://www.eset.com >> >> >> > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:53:50 -0500 > From: "justino at anihilo.com" > To: microsound at or8.net > Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > Message-ID: <380-2200912215225350453 at M2W128.mail2web.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > Hola Kim, > Count me in > paz > jorge > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:05:12 -0200 > From: Renato Fabbri > To: microsound at microsound.org, justino at anihilo.com > Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ?<1f50cb500912151505r54613dbdga33c8305141104a2 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > 5 is my number, couldn't resist it... > > 2009/12/15 justino at anihilo.com : >> Hola Kim, >> Count me in >> paz >> jorge >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> mail2web - Check your email from the web at >> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > > -- > Linux User #479299 > skype: fabbri.renato > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:14:31 +0000 (UTC) > From: fdurso at comcast.net > To: microsound at or8.net > Subject: Re: [microsound] microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 6 > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ?<1229826544.397271260918871108.JavaMail.root at sz0161a.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > I am > > > Frank > > > ----------------------------------- From: Kim Cascone < kim at anechoicmedia.com > > To: microsound_list < microsound at or8.net > > Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > Message-ID: < 4B27FFFC.10408 at anechoicmedia.com > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:15:13 -0500 > From: michael trommer > To: > Subject: Re: [microsound] post-laptop era? > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; ? ? ? charset="US-ASCII" > > Re. computer with a non-computer interface - it seems to me that most > digital gear is exactly that, be it an mpc or one of those 'workstation' > keyboards. > > Re. the loss of musical traditions, I think that many > hip-hop/glitch/house/techno artists would disagree - many would argue that > the mpc/303/808/909 etc. is/are at the foundation of the style and sound of > their music. > > Sampling as 'merely a sound effect', eh ? Wooh...there's a can of worms > you've opened... > > i'd also be careful about positioning the 'old' 'real' aesthetics of a > coltrane against the 'new' - it reminds me of when people were arguing that > 'real' music was played on guitars (or whatever) and that anything played on > electronic instruments wasn't 'real' music. As a kid it usually boiled down > to a drunken argument of zeppelin vs. kraftwerk...stupid. > > > On 12/15/09 3:00 PM, "David Powers" wrote: > >> Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. >> >> To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives >> me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such >> an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological >> obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any >> new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is >> difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is >> possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range >> of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might >> say so, even rather "amateurish". >> >> However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result >> of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much >> important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great >> musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian >> classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European >> classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a >> huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and >> possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, >> leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering >> the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, >> if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. >> >> The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel >> dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; >> it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the >> inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference >> between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's >> saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a >> sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner >> structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, >> Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's >> recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up >> the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One >> might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in >> Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an >> empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, >> the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a >> distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with >> the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order >> to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something >> which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is >> it just a simple pastiche of the two. >> >> In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere >> progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under >> the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event >> rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities >> for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it >> is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress >> remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the >> society of controlled consumption. >> >> If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps >> it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid >> of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we >> can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of >> the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the >> accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. >> >> ~David >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller >> wrote: >>> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... >>> >>> On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: >>> >>> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the >>> state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music >>> used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing realtime >>> manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with >>> other (real?) instruments. >>> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, >>> music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >>> Hi! >>> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >>> >>> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new >>> music >>> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >>> the other is the death of laptop music >>> >>> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and >>> .microsound >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> Adern X >>> http://www.xevor.net >>> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >>> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > End of microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 9 > ***************************************** > From technohead3d at googlemail.com Tue Dec 15 18:22:11 2009 From: technohead3d at googlemail.com (Adam Davis) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:22:11 +0000 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <1f50cb500912151505r54613dbdga33c8305141104a2@mail.gmail.com> References: <380-2200912215225350453@M2W128.mail2web.com> <1f50cb500912151505r54613dbdga33c8305141104a2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5badef3b0912151522o673b0db9r34546253ef8a4cfb@mail.gmail.com> Yuh huh! 2009/12/15 Renato Fabbri > 5 is my number, couldn't resist it... > > 2009/12/15 justino at anihilo.com : > > Hola Kim, > > Count me in > > paz > > jorge > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > > http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > microsound mailing list > > microsound at microsound.org > > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > > > -- > Linux User #479299 > skype: fabbri.renato > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paulo.mouat at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 18:29:00 2009 From: paulo.mouat at gmail.com (Paulo Mouat) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:29:00 -0500 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <424ce300912151529o343c0dbbye29251bec4746b42@mail.gmail.com> Check my 'Konzentrische' piece (link in my sig). It was all done with acoustic instruments, recordings of which were subject to extreme speed variations, speed fluctuation, filtering, EQ and layering (absolutely no electronic sounds or sophisticated processing were used). It's about 17 minutes total, though. //p http://www.interdisciplina.org/00.0 On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using > acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music > sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have > ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax > mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended > techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update the > list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken > down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From technohead3d at googlemail.com Tue Dec 15 18:29:26 2009 From: technohead3d at googlemail.com (Adam Davis) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:29:26 +0000 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <5badef3b0912151529g2d3f07d2u1b55b5918dad191e@mail.gmail.com> Shall indeed be taking part :) 2009/12/15 Kim Cascone > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using > acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music > sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have > ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax > mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended > techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update the > list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken > down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From technohead3d at googlemail.com Tue Dec 15 18:29:26 2009 From: technohead3d at googlemail.com (Adam Davis) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:29:26 +0000 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <5badef3b0912151529g2d3f07d2u1b55b5918dad191e@mail.gmail.com> Shall indeed be taking part :) 2009/12/15 Kim Cascone > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using > acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music > sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have > ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax > mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended > techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update the > list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken > down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roger at eartrumpet.org Tue Dec 15 18:29:39 2009 From: roger at eartrumpet.org (Roger Mills) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:29:39 +1100 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: Sounds good..can get something by February no problems. r -- Roger Mills http://www.eartrumpet.org http://www.furthernoise.org http://ethernetorchestra.netpraxis.net From roachboy at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 18:32:15 2009 From: roachboy at gmail.com (Stephen Hastings-King) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:32:15 -0500 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <424ce300912151529o343c0dbbye29251bec4746b42@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> <424ce300912151529o343c0dbbye29251bec4746b42@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3a5562340912151532kc3ae871ne4acdd52b203f518@mail.gmail.com> the recordings from our spurious landscapes project available on my website www.clairaudient.org fall under this category i think. turn the volume up to get the spatialization... stephen On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Paulo Mouat wrote: > > Check my 'Konzentrische' piece (link in my sig). It was all done with > acoustic instruments, recordings of which were subject to extreme speed > variations, speed fluctuation, filtering, EQ and layering (absolutely no > electronic sounds or sophisticated processing were used). It's about 17 > minutes total, though. > > > //p > http://www.interdisciplina.org/00.0 > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > >> .microsound community project: microacoustic music >> >> what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? >> is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using >> acoustic musical instruments? >> what is the sound of microacoustic music? >> let's find out >> each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music >> sounds like to them >> >> >> GUIDELINES: >> >> - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum >> >> - deadline: February 1 2010 >> >> - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces >> (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have >> ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! >> content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments >> with NO processing other than the following: >> - mixing/layering >> - editing (cut 'n paste) >> - slowing down or speeding up >> - filtering/EQ >> >> instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax >> mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended >> techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing >> >> files should be placed here: >> >> http://www.microsound.org/repository/ >> >> there is also a link on the microsound.org front page >> >> ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files >> >> the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers >> >> if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update >> the list >> (has to be done by hand IIRC) >> >> ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken >> down___ >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tobiasreber at sunrise.ch Tue Dec 15 18:41:28 2009 From: tobiasreber at sunrise.ch (Tobias Reber) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:41:28 +0100 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <3A796263-BF52-4E68-B5AE-5DD6E9FA6B84@sunrise.ch> i am. tobias Am 15.12.2009 um 22:30 schrieb Kim Cascone: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound --- Tobias Reber : musician / sound designer Tobias Reber Freiburgstrasse 32 2503 Biel Switzerland mobile: ++41 (0)79 573 11 69 email: tobiasreber at sunrise.ch www.myspace.com/stereorabbi From milan.lists at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 18:48:02 2009 From: milan.lists at gmail.com (Milan Davidovic) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:48:02 -0500 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <98b2fdd50912151548k2f500b00m90f094d20b0d747c@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments Including human voice? -- Milan Davidovic http://altmilan.blogspot.com From kolesny at hotmail.com Tue Dec 15 18:49:09 2009 From: kolesny at hotmail.com (Lin Zhang) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:49:09 +0000 Subject: [microsound] microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 5 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <054CB01D-526F-443A-B551-AC6228EA91FB@hotmail.com> +1, as one prefer not purely depending on laptop. Look forward to hear. On 15 Dec 2009, at 21:52, microsound-request at or8.net wrote: > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:30:36 -0800 > From: Kim Cascone > To: microsound_list > Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > Message-ID: <4B27FFFC.10408 at anechoicmedia.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From listekutusu at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 19:10:02 2009 From: listekutusu at gmail.com (Korhan Erel) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:10:02 +0200 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <9482DE4E-6879-44C6-B53A-F4025F0FE46C@gmail.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> <9482DE4E-6879-44C6-B53A-F4025F0FE46C@gmail.com> Message-ID: so am I Korhan On 16.Ara.2009, at 00:03, Kevin Paul wrote: > I'm interested. > > Kevin Paul > > On Dec 15, 2009, at 2:30 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > >> I have an idea >> headcount please? >> then I'll explain >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From jcespinosa at aol.com Tue Dec 15 19:08:46 2009 From: jcespinosa at aol.com (Juan Carlos Espinosa) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:08:46 -0500 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <89CA6C6F-F673-46EE-8505-6C3AAC5FE7B3@aol.com> This sounds like fun. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 15, 2009, at 5:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into > using acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic > music sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and > have ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a > sax mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use > extended techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de) > composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload > files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to > update the list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be > taken down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From jcespinosa at aol.com Tue Dec 15 19:08:46 2009 From: jcespinosa at aol.com (Juan Carlos Espinosa) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:08:46 -0500 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <89CA6C6F-F673-46EE-8505-6C3AAC5FE7B3@aol.com> This sounds like fun. Sent from my iPhone On Dec 15, 2009, at 5:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into > using acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic > music sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and > have ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a > sax mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use > extended techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de) > composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload > files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to > update the list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be > taken down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From cyborgk at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 19:31:06 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:31:06 -0600 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: References: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:15 PM, michael trommer wrote: > Re. computer with a non-computer interface - it seems to me that most > digital gear is exactly that, be it an mpc or one of those 'workstation' > keyboards. > > Re. the loss of musical traditions, I think that many > hip-hop/glitch/house/techno artists would disagree - many would argue that > the mpc/303/808/909 etc. is/are at the foundation of the style and sound of > their music. Does music made with an 808 etc. have anything to do with the rich tradition of human music making that is thousands of years old? I think it is pretty clear that it does have to do with that tradition, that the sounds people came up with in 1982 or 1992 or 2002 or the present didn't just appear in a vacuum. In a way you prove my point... If someone thinks the 808 is the "foundation" of their style and sound, they have entirely forgotten everything that came before the 808 existed. I would argue that there is no foundation at all, rather than a foundation there is a history, and you can always look deeper into the history. Not only that, but if a machine is the "foundation" of a style and sound, what exactly is the role of the human being? What is the role of human freedom and creativity? Finally, I'm not sure if you are actually saying anything at all: you might as well say that "paint" is the foundation of the style of all painters. But does that statement, in itself, have anything more than formal or tautological meaning? > Sampling as 'merely a sound effect', eh ? Wooh...there's a can of worms > you've opened... Note, that I did not say sampling is necessarily, or always, or only a sound effect. I in no way mean to imply that sampling is somehow, in its essence, problematic. I would add that it is not only sampling, but also most DSP, and, if one seeks a less controversial example, how about the ubiquitous presence of the "Auto-Tune" effect on vocals in pop music in recent years? I do see the trend in digital music making as similar to a trend in Hollywood, to create movies that are always bigger and "badder" with always more special effects, but at the same time always less coherence, less construction, until the film threatens to become nothing but montage of effects strung mindlessly together to form a bombastic surface. And while digital music is the easiest culprit to pinpoint within the current musical landscape, I would add that for American music produced via industrial processes, this is nothing new; I would say this goes for most popular music made since the creation of music became an industrialized process. > i'd also be careful about positioning the 'old' 'real' aesthetics of a > coltrane against the 'new' - it reminds me of when people were arguing that > 'real' music was played on guitars (or whatever) and that anything played on > electronic instruments wasn't 'real' music. As a kid it usually boiled down > to a drunken argument of zeppelin vs. kraftwerk...stupid. Now here you have entirely misread me. The question isn't about the authentic old against the real new; the question is, why isn't the new really new? Why isn't technological progress leading to much apparent musical innovation. As far as Zeppelin vs. Kraftwerk, though I'm not as big a Kraftwerk fan as some, I think my argument would clearly be aligned with Kraftwerk as really making a kind of break from their tradition, while Zeppelin were rehashing the same old rock and roll riffs. The Coltrane example was picked not because it involved acoustic instruments, or because it occurred in some golden age of authentic music. It simply was the example that occurred to me most spontaneously, and I'm sure that there are musicians working with digital technologies in the year 2009 that are following in the same tradition; I'm just not immediately aware of them. I stand by my argument, though, that innovation in its current phase probably requires, not a return to tradition, but an awareness of and willingness to learn from tradition in order to move forward. There are plenty of interesting theories and traditions of music; if one were to seriously study even one of these traditions, and take that tradition seriously, I have no doubt that something novel would be created as a result. The problem is the postmodern tendency to equalize all traditions as being simply individual preferences, and then to use them only as empty signs, rather than seeking to penetrate the inner substance of these traditions with all their contradictions and unrealized possibilities. To put it another way, innovation requires tension, an encounter with some Other that challenges the coordinates from which one creates--even if that Other is in fact found within one's own work or tradition. One key problem with much of today's music is that there is no inner tension, and thus nothing can ever really develop. Familiarity with the great musical traditions can help develop the sense of history and the awareness of how great music works, allowing one to see the inner tensions in one's own practice and develop them into something new. Especially key here is to examine how substantial innovations have occurred within the great traditions, to examine the practices and internal contradictions that brought about Beethoven, Chopin, or Charlie Parker. Ultimately, I stand by my point--the future is not to be found in new technologies, better interfaces, and all the rest. The future is in fact already here, hiding within the past and the present, but only on the condition that as a free human being, one has the audacity to open one's eyes and see it. > > On 12/15/09 3:00 PM, "David Powers" wrote: > >> Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. >> >> To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives >> me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such >> an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological >> obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any >> new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is >> difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is >> possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range >> of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might >> say so, even rather "amateurish". >> >> However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result >> of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much >> important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great >> musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian >> classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European >> classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a >> huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and >> possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, >> leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering >> the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, >> if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. >> >> The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel >> dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; >> it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the >> inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference >> between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's >> saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a >> sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner >> structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, >> Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's >> recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up >> the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One >> might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in >> Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an >> empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, >> the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a >> distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with >> the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order >> to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something >> which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is >> it just a simple pastiche of the two. >> >> In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere >> progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under >> the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event >> rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities >> for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it >> is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress >> remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the >> society of controlled consumption. >> >> If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps >> it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid >> of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we >> can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of >> the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the >> accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. >> >> ~David >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller >> wrote: >>> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... >>> >>> On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: >>> >>> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the >>> state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music >>> used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing realtime >>> manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with >>> other (real?) instruments. >>> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, >>> music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >>> Hi! >>> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >>> >>> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new >>> music >>> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >>> the other is the death of laptop music >>> >>> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and >>> .microsound >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> Adern X >>> http://www.xevor.net >>> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >>> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From cyborgk at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 19:39:18 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:39:18 -0600 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912151639n73ad7091le0956e3d90dc7bb7@mail.gmail.com> I play piano, but I don't have access to an acoustic piano currently. What would be the acceptable solution. Offhand, I could either use the sampled piano I practice on, or create something by cutting up a classical composition. Could you clarify whether either technique would fall within the domain of what you propose? ~David On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using > acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music > sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have > ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax > mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended > techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update the > list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken > down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From mail at purelovepower.com Tue Dec 15 20:16:45 2009 From: mail at purelovepower.com (john hanes) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:16:45 -0800 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: hand me that kool aid. i'm in. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -- http://organofqwerty.blogspot.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noisesmith at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 20:37:03 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:37:03 -0800 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B2839BF.5060705@gmail.com> Today's music tends toward lowest-common-denominator structure, constrained only by a 4/4 backbeat and the 12th root of 2. Everything else seems to become a decoration of those two constants. And then on the other hand there is noise, where anything goes, and nothing retains meaning, and the only significance to be had is in a novel way to make a loud or irritating sound. I am not personally being judgmental here - this describes most of the music I listen to or make. Once upon a time listeners and makers of music thought that the structure of a composition could carry some meaning, and was a place where innovation could happen. What changed? One would think that the ability to record, rewind, and relisten would favor nuance, innovation, and complexity, rather than obliterating it as it so nearly has. Perhaps it didn't change, and most music has always been this simple, and the change is that anyone can record their music, so the voice of the academic is drowned out in the tastes of the rabble. The new technologies of music production are designed to erase the ugly and happy accidents that come with being an amateur, that at one time would have evolved into a new style. The technologies at hand for the amateur musician are good enough that most innovation will now come from perverse usage of the technologies, as we have already seen in the misuse of autotune, the misuse of clipping, bending and breaking consumer electronics, intentional speed change artifacts etc. David Powers wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:15 PM, michael trommer wrote: >> Re. computer with a non-computer interface - it seems to me that most >> digital gear is exactly that, be it an mpc or one of those 'workstation' >> keyboards. >> >> Re. the loss of musical traditions, I think that many >> hip-hop/glitch/house/techno artists would disagree - many would argue that >> the mpc/303/808/909 etc. is/are at the foundation of the style and sound of >> their music. > > Does music made with an 808 etc. have anything to do with the rich > tradition of human music making that is thousands of years old? I > think it is pretty clear that it does have to do with that tradition, > that the sounds people came up with in 1982 or 1992 or 2002 or the > present didn't just appear in a vacuum. In a way you prove my point... > If someone thinks the 808 is the "foundation" of their style and > sound, they have entirely forgotten everything that came before the > 808 existed. I would argue that there is no foundation at all, rather > than a foundation there is a history, and you can always look deeper > into the history. > > Not only that, but if a machine is the "foundation" of a style and > sound, what exactly is the role of the human being? What is the role > of human freedom and creativity? > > Finally, I'm not sure if you are actually saying anything at all: you > might as well say that "paint" is the foundation of the style of all > painters. But does that statement, in itself, have anything more than > formal or tautological meaning? > >> Sampling as 'merely a sound effect', eh ? Wooh...there's a can of worms >> you've opened... > > Note, that I did not say sampling is necessarily, or always, or only a > sound effect. I in no way mean to imply that sampling is somehow, in > its essence, problematic. I would add that it is not only sampling, > but also most DSP, and, if one seeks a less controversial example, how > about the ubiquitous presence of the "Auto-Tune" effect on vocals in > pop music in recent years? > > I do see the trend in digital music making as similar to a trend in > Hollywood, to create movies that are always bigger and "badder" with > always more special effects, but at the same time always less > coherence, less construction, until the film threatens to become > nothing but montage of effects strung mindlessly together to form a > bombastic surface. And while digital music is the easiest culprit to > pinpoint within the current musical landscape, I would add that for > American music produced via industrial processes, this is nothing new; > I would say this goes for most popular music made since the creation > of music became an industrialized process. > >> i'd also be careful about positioning the 'old' 'real' aesthetics of a >> coltrane against the 'new' - it reminds me of when people were arguing that >> 'real' music was played on guitars (or whatever) and that anything played on >> electronic instruments wasn't 'real' music. As a kid it usually boiled down >> to a drunken argument of zeppelin vs. kraftwerk...stupid. > > Now here you have entirely misread me. The question isn't about the > authentic old against the real new; the question is, why isn't the new > really new? Why isn't technological progress leading to much apparent > musical innovation. > > As far as Zeppelin vs. Kraftwerk, though I'm not as big a Kraftwerk > fan as some, I think my argument would clearly be aligned with > Kraftwerk as really making a kind of break from their tradition, while > Zeppelin were rehashing the same old rock and roll riffs. The Coltrane > example was picked not because it involved acoustic instruments, or > because it occurred in some golden age of authentic music. It simply > was the example that occurred to me most spontaneously, and I'm sure > that there are musicians working with digital technologies in the year > 2009 that are following in the same tradition; I'm just not > immediately aware of them. > > I stand by my argument, though, that innovation in its current phase > probably requires, not a return to tradition, but an awareness of and > willingness to learn from tradition in order to move forward. There > are plenty of interesting theories and traditions of music; if one > were to seriously study even one of these traditions, and take that > tradition seriously, I have no doubt that something novel would be > created as a result. The problem is the postmodern tendency to > equalize all traditions as being simply individual preferences, and > then to use them only as empty signs, rather than seeking to penetrate > the inner substance of these traditions with all their contradictions > and unrealized possibilities. To put it another way, innovation > requires tension, an encounter with some Other that challenges the > coordinates from which one creates--even if that Other is in fact > found within one's own work or tradition. One key problem with much of > today's music is that there is no inner tension, and thus nothing can > ever really develop. Familiarity with the great musical traditions can > help develop the sense of history and the awareness of how great music > works, allowing one to see the inner tensions in one's own practice > and develop them into something new. Especially key here is to examine > how substantial innovations have occurred within the great traditions, > to examine the practices and internal contradictions that brought > about Beethoven, Chopin, or Charlie Parker. > > Ultimately, I stand by my point--the future is not to be found in new > technologies, better interfaces, and all the rest. The future is in > fact already here, hiding within the past and the present, but only on > the condition that as a free human being, one has the audacity to open > one's eyes and see it. > >> On 12/15/09 3:00 PM, "David Powers" wrote: >> >>> Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. >>> >>> To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives >>> me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such >>> an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological >>> obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any >>> new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is >>> difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is >>> possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range >>> of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might >>> say so, even rather "amateurish". >>> >>> However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result >>> of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much >>> important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great >>> musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian >>> classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European >>> classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a >>> huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and >>> possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, >>> leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering >>> the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, >>> if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. >>> >>> The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel >>> dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; >>> it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the >>> inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference >>> between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's >>> saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a >>> sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner >>> structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, >>> Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's >>> recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up >>> the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One >>> might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in >>> Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an >>> empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, >>> the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a >>> distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with >>> the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order >>> to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something >>> which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is >>> it just a simple pastiche of the two. >>> >>> In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere >>> progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under >>> the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event >>> rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities >>> for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it >>> is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress >>> remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the >>> society of controlled consumption. >>> >>> If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps >>> it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid >>> of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we >>> can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of >>> the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the >>> accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. >>> >>> ~David >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller >>> wrote: >>>> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... >>>> >>>> On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: >>>> >>>> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the >>>> state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music >>>> used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing realtime >>>> manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with >>>> other (real?) instruments. >>>> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, >>>> music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >>>> Hi! >>>> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >>>> >>>> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new >>>> music >>>> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >>>> the other is the death of laptop music >>>> >>>> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and >>>> .microsound >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> Adern X >>>> http://www.xevor.net >>>> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >>>> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From triphaze at privatelektro.de Tue Dec 15 20:47:26 2009 From: triphaze at privatelektro.de (triphaze at privatelektro.de) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:47:26 +0100 (CET) Subject: [microsound] =?iso-8859-1?q?***microacoustic_music_project***?= Message-ID: <20091216014726.4A8CF728002@mis13.de> thats what i am doing since some years now... microsounders are moving.. its good to hear and watch the process. i will take part http://myspace.com/marekbrandt http://privatelektro.de http://endliche-automaten.de From list at isjtar.org Tue Dec 15 21:18:38 2009 From: list at isjtar.org (isjtar) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:18:38 +0100 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B28437E.30806@isjtar.org> your argument, articulately worded I must say, is elitist and surprisingly uninformed. I'm not a big fan of pop culture, but that everybody can make music is a great trend. I've heard wonderful things made by unschooled people, a lot more engaging than many pieces made in the fine tradition. aside from that, you seem to deliberately ignore 20th century evolutions in music. we didn't get to this point from nowhere. from stravinsky, shoenberg, cage, xenakis and from kraftwerk, zappa, autechre, whatever. the reduction to "coherent" pieces of the great tradition is as limiting as imposing "coherent" story-telling in a film in the american way, oh and there's Hollywood again. the evolution of different paints and pigments did have an enormous influence in painting. inventing new instruments was always important, most instruments played now are very young in their current form. furthermore, many composers and musicians are very aware of the various traditions and try to understand and learn from them. actually where does this stereotype of current "digital music" come from? the traditionalist theory is stale. getting into semantics about "foundation" is pointless too. can you say the the nocturnes by chopin would sound the same if they were played on a harmonica and trombone? of course an 808 is not a singular blob in history, but it was extremely influential in the evolution of popular electronic music. David Powers wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:15 PM, michael trommer wrote: > >> Re. computer with a non-computer interface - it seems to me that most >> digital gear is exactly that, be it an mpc or one of those 'workstation' >> keyboards. >> >> Re. the loss of musical traditions, I think that many >> hip-hop/glitch/house/techno artists would disagree - many would argue that >> the mpc/303/808/909 etc. is/are at the foundation of the style and sound of >> their music. >> > > Does music made with an 808 etc. have anything to do with the rich > tradition of human music making that is thousands of years old? I > think it is pretty clear that it does have to do with that tradition, > that the sounds people came up with in 1982 or 1992 or 2002 or the > present didn't just appear in a vacuum. In a way you prove my point... > If someone thinks the 808 is the "foundation" of their style and > sound, they have entirely forgotten everything that came before the > 808 existed. I would argue that there is no foundation at all, rather > than a foundation there is a history, and you can always look deeper > into the history. > > Not only that, but if a machine is the "foundation" of a style and > sound, what exactly is the role of the human being? What is the role > of human freedom and creativity? > > Finally, I'm not sure if you are actually saying anything at all: you > might as well say that "paint" is the foundation of the style of all > painters. But does that statement, in itself, have anything more than > formal or tautological meaning? > > >> Sampling as 'merely a sound effect', eh ? Wooh...there's a can of worms >> you've opened... >> > > Note, that I did not say sampling is necessarily, or always, or only a > sound effect. I in no way mean to imply that sampling is somehow, in > its essence, problematic. I would add that it is not only sampling, > but also most DSP, and, if one seeks a less controversial example, how > about the ubiquitous presence of the "Auto-Tune" effect on vocals in > pop music in recent years? > > I do see the trend in digital music making as similar to a trend in > Hollywood, to create movies that are always bigger and "badder" with > always more special effects, but at the same time always less > coherence, less construction, until the film threatens to become > nothing but montage of effects strung mindlessly together to form a > bombastic surface. And while digital music is the easiest culprit to > pinpoint within the current musical landscape, I would add that for > American music produced via industrial processes, this is nothing new; > I would say this goes for most popular music made since the creation > of music became an industrialized process. > > >> i'd also be careful about positioning the 'old' 'real' aesthetics of a >> coltrane against the 'new' - it reminds me of when people were arguing that >> 'real' music was played on guitars (or whatever) and that anything played on >> electronic instruments wasn't 'real' music. As a kid it usually boiled down >> to a drunken argument of zeppelin vs. kraftwerk...stupid. >> > > Now here you have entirely misread me. The question isn't about the > authentic old against the real new; the question is, why isn't the new > really new? Why isn't technological progress leading to much apparent > musical innovation. > > As far as Zeppelin vs. Kraftwerk, though I'm not as big a Kraftwerk > fan as some, I think my argument would clearly be aligned with > Kraftwerk as really making a kind of break from their tradition, while > Zeppelin were rehashing the same old rock and roll riffs. The Coltrane > example was picked not because it involved acoustic instruments, or > because it occurred in some golden age of authentic music. It simply > was the example that occurred to me most spontaneously, and I'm sure > that there are musicians working with digital technologies in the year > 2009 that are following in the same tradition; I'm just not > immediately aware of them. > > I stand by my argument, though, that innovation in its current phase > probably requires, not a return to tradition, but an awareness of and > willingness to learn from tradition in order to move forward. There > are plenty of interesting theories and traditions of music; if one > were to seriously study even one of these traditions, and take that > tradition seriously, I have no doubt that something novel would be > created as a result. The problem is the postmodern tendency to > equalize all traditions as being simply individual preferences, and > then to use them only as empty signs, rather than seeking to penetrate > the inner substance of these traditions with all their contradictions > and unrealized possibilities. To put it another way, innovation > requires tension, an encounter with some Other that challenges the > coordinates from which one creates--even if that Other is in fact > found within one's own work or tradition. One key problem with much of > today's music is that there is no inner tension, and thus nothing can > ever really develop. Familiarity with the great musical traditions can > help develop the sense of history and the awareness of how great music > works, allowing one to see the inner tensions in one's own practice > and develop them into something new. Especially key here is to examine > how substantial innovations have occurred within the great traditions, > to examine the practices and internal contradictions that brought > about Beethoven, Chopin, or Charlie Parker. > > Ultimately, I stand by my point--the future is not to be found in new > technologies, better interfaces, and all the rest. The future is in > fact already here, hiding within the past and the present, but only on > the condition that as a free human being, one has the audacity to open > one's eyes and see it. > > >> On 12/15/09 3:00 PM, "David Powers" wrote: >> >> >>> Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. >>> >>> To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives >>> me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such >>> an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological >>> obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any >>> new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is >>> difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is >>> possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range >>> of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might >>> say so, even rather "amateurish". >>> >>> However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result >>> of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much >>> important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great >>> musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian >>> classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European >>> classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a >>> huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and >>> possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, >>> leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering >>> the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, >>> if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. >>> >>> The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel >>> dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; >>> it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the >>> inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference >>> between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's >>> saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a >>> sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner >>> structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, >>> Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's >>> recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up >>> the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One >>> might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in >>> Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an >>> empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, >>> the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a >>> distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with >>> the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order >>> to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something >>> which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is >>> it just a simple pastiche of the two. >>> >>> In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere >>> progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under >>> the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event >>> rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities >>> for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it >>> is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress >>> remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the >>> society of controlled consumption. >>> >>> If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps >>> it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid >>> of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we >>> can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of >>> the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the >>> accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. >>> >>> ~David >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller >>> wrote: >>> >>>> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... >>>> >>>> On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: >>>> >>>> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the >>>> state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music >>>> used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing realtime >>>> manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with >>>> other (real?) instruments. >>>> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, >>>> music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >>>> Hi! >>>> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >>>> >>>> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new >>>> music >>>> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >>>> the other is the death of laptop music >>>> >>>> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and >>>> .microsound >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> Adern X >>>> http://www.xevor.net >>>> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >>>> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From david.leith at telus.net Tue Dec 15 21:57:55 2009 From: david.leith at telus.net (David Leith) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:57:55 -0800 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <03BC95FA-5FCB-4A01-A84D-689CCF15DE57@telus.net> interested On Dec 15, 2009, at 2:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift > into using acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic > music sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps > and have ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a > sax mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use > extended techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de) > composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload > files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to > update the list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be > taken down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From cyborgk at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 22:21:32 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:21:32 -0600 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <4B28437E.30806@isjtar.org> References: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> <4B28437E.30806@isjtar.org> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912151921y671d203csc2c0d538a3fb93e6@mail.gmail.com> 1. On my choice of artists You should note, I never picked any one style. I do mention classical and experimental music, which certainly covers Stravinsky, Shoenberg, Cage, and Xenakis. Kraftwerk, Zappa, and Autechre are all worth listening to as well, they just don't happen to be influences that touch me as deeply on a personal level. My example was John Coltrane, who recorded "My Favorite Things" in 1961. Is he not as worthy of mention as the composers you mention? (If I was going to be harsh, I would ask, who is elitist when you mention all people of white European descent and totally ignore the great 20th century innovations of Afro-Americans in music?) 2. On "coherence" (admittedly an ambiguous term, in retrospect) By the way, your argument about coherence is problematic; I don't think you understand what I mean. Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Cage, Xenakis, Kraftwerk, Zappa, and Autechre all develop their music in a coherent way. They take it seriously, and they see the consequences of what they are doing, and their art progresses over time. So how is coherence limiting to them? What is limiting, is when people just string a bunch of sounds together for no reason and call it a piece. Unless they happen to be blessed with unusual genius, it is precisely this which is limiting: since there is no reason for one sound to follow another, there is no ability to evaluate whether the piece is a success, nor is there any reason to try things one way instead of another. In short, some kind of internal coherence is necessary for sustained coherence: even if the result of this inner coherence seems incoherent itself (one might say that Cage blends coherence and incoherence in an interesting way)!!! Your reference to story telling also confuses me. Of course stories do not need to be "told in a coherent way." But that doesn't mean an author shouldn't follow some type of procedure that is itself coherent. I never said the results have to be "transparent" or simple or understandable to common sense. Is Finnegans Wake coherent? Definitely, but it is not in any way easy to read or understand. Its coherence resides in its inner structure and the procedures used to create it. It is the outwardly "coherent" pop songs of today, that are the least coherent in their internal structure, after all. What I have a problem with is the cut-and-paste pastiche, where everything goes with everything else, and where there is no reason why one sound should follow another. Imagine a music producer in the studio whose conversation is something like this: "Okay, let's put a sample of a sitar on top to make it sound exotic. Then, lets put the voice through auto-tune, cus it really worked for Kanye. Hmmm, let's put some weird glitch effect here cus glitch is cool right now. And let's use an 808, cus that sound is so classic, the kids love it." And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great musicians out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. 3. On elitism, relativism, and democracy in art First of all, being elitist is no crime. We need more elitism, if by elitism you mean making aesthetic and ethical value judgments, challenging the mainstream ideological discourses, and asserting the possibility of experiencing a real freedom. Elitism is always the defense of relativist postmodernism, which itself is just the ideology of the marketplace where freedom means freedom to choose a brand of soap and where everything is equal only because everything is offered up for sale. As far as computers allowing everyone to make music, well, everybody can already make music. If you have a voice or hands, you can make music. You don't need a computer for that! Or a melodica, for instance, costs only $35 at the nearby store, it is an easy instrument to learn, and far cheaper than a computer. Why do you believe that only with computers is there a trend for "everybody to make music"? Isn't it true that people have been making music together for thousands of years? Why is a computer more liberating than the ability to sing or play an instrument? I would argue that technological advances absolutely CANNOT and WILL NOT liberate on their own. The ear is the fundamental instrument, without the ability to perceive, the discipline to learn from what you hear, and the awareness of human freedom to create, technology does nothing to liberate individuals to be artists. Not only that, but digital technology tends to make people less and less aware of their vibrations as they become physically removed from the sound and become less sensitized to the actual vibrations their actions are creating. Take the example of poetry. Does the fact that everyone can speak make everyone a poet? Anyone can come up with a rhyme, but creating something that is moving or profound or meaningful takes discipline, persistence, courage, and hard work. Even something as simple as telling a joke well is not something that everyone can do. Finally, This has nothing to do with "schooled" versus "unschooled." I dropped out of college, am about 95% self taught in the area of music, and was already happily making music before I get to college. But being unschooled is no excuse for not learning from the past and applying those lessons to the present. Why are people so afraid of learning from our past? What is the resistance to learning from the great traditions of music? Shouldn't everyone who aspires to make music WANT to learn as much about it as they can, in order to make the greatest impact in our limited time on this planet? ~David On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 8:18 PM, isjtar wrote: > your argument, articulately worded I must say, is elitist and > surprisingly uninformed. > I'm not a big fan of pop culture, but that everybody can make music is a > great trend. I've heard wonderful things made by unschooled people, a > lot more engaging than many pieces made in the fine tradition. > aside from that, you seem to deliberately ignore 20th century evolutions > in music. we didn't get to this point from nowhere. > from stravinsky, shoenberg, cage, xenakis and from kraftwerk, zappa, > autechre, whatever. > > the reduction to "coherent" pieces of the great tradition is as limiting > as imposing "coherent" story-telling in a film in the american way, oh > and there's Hollywood again. > the evolution of different paints and pigments did have an enormous > influence in painting. inventing new instruments was always important, > most instruments played now are very young in their current form. > > furthermore, many composers and musicians are very aware of the various > traditions and try to understand and learn from them. > > actually where does this stereotype of current "digital music" come from? > the traditionalist theory is stale. > > getting into semantics about "foundation" is pointless too. can you say > the the nocturnes by chopin would sound the same if they were played on > a harmonica and trombone? of course an 808 is not a singular blob in > history, but it was extremely influential in the evolution of popular > electronic music. > > David Powers wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:15 PM, michael trommer wrote: >> >>> Re. computer with a non-computer interface - it seems to me that most >>> digital gear is exactly that, be it an mpc or one of those 'workstation' >>> keyboards. >>> >>> Re. the loss of musical traditions, I think that many >>> hip-hop/glitch/house/techno artists would disagree - many would argue that >>> the mpc/303/808/909 etc. is/are at the foundation of the style and sound of >>> their music. >>> >> >> Does music made with an 808 etc. have anything to do with the rich >> tradition of human music making that is thousands of years old? I >> think it is pretty clear that it does have to do with that tradition, >> that the sounds people came up with in 1982 or 1992 or 2002 or the >> present didn't just appear in a vacuum. In a way you prove my point... >> If someone thinks the 808 is the "foundation" of their style and >> sound, they have entirely forgotten everything that came before the >> 808 existed. I would argue that there is no foundation at all, rather >> than a foundation there is a history, and you can always look deeper >> into the history. >> >> Not only that, but if a machine is the "foundation" of a style and >> sound, what exactly is the role of the human being? What is the role >> of human freedom and creativity? >> >> Finally, I'm not sure if you are actually saying anything at all: you >> might as well say that "paint" is the foundation of the style of all >> painters. But does that statement, in itself, have anything more than >> formal or tautological meaning? >> >> >>> Sampling as 'merely a sound effect', eh ? Wooh...there's a can of worms >>> you've opened... >>> >> >> Note, that I did not say sampling is necessarily, or always, or only a >> sound effect. I in no way mean to imply that sampling is somehow, in >> its essence, problematic. I would add that it is not only sampling, >> but also most DSP, and, if one seeks a less controversial example, how >> about the ubiquitous presence of the "Auto-Tune" effect on vocals in >> pop music in recent years? >> >> I do see the trend in digital music making as similar to a trend in >> Hollywood, to create movies that are always bigger and "badder" with >> always more special effects, but at the same time always less >> coherence, less construction, until the film threatens to become >> nothing but montage of effects strung mindlessly together to form a >> bombastic surface. And while digital music is the easiest culprit to >> pinpoint within the current musical landscape, I would add that for >> American music produced via industrial processes, this is nothing new; >> I would say this goes for most popular music made since the creation >> of music became an industrialized process. >> >> >>> i'd also be careful about positioning the 'old' 'real' aesthetics of a >>> coltrane against the 'new' - it reminds me of when people were arguing that >>> 'real' music was played on guitars (or whatever) and that anything played on >>> electronic instruments wasn't 'real' music. As a kid it usually boiled down >>> to a drunken argument of zeppelin vs. kraftwerk...stupid. >>> >> >> Now here you have entirely misread me. The question isn't about the >> authentic old against the real new; the question is, why isn't the new >> really new? Why isn't technological progress leading to much apparent >> musical innovation. >> >> As far as Zeppelin vs. Kraftwerk, though I'm not as big a Kraftwerk >> fan as some, I think my argument would clearly be aligned with >> Kraftwerk as really making a kind of break from their tradition, while >> Zeppelin were rehashing the same old rock and roll riffs. The Coltrane >> example was picked not because it involved acoustic instruments, or >> because it occurred in some golden age of authentic music. It simply >> was the example that occurred to me most spontaneously, and I'm sure >> that there are musicians working with digital technologies in the year >> 2009 that are following in the same tradition; I'm just not >> immediately aware of them. >> >> I stand by my argument, though, that innovation in its current phase >> probably requires, not a return to tradition, but an awareness of and >> willingness to learn from tradition in order to move forward. There >> are plenty of interesting theories and traditions of music; if one >> were to seriously study even one of these traditions, and take that >> tradition seriously, I have no doubt that something novel would be >> created as a result. The problem is the postmodern tendency to >> equalize all traditions as being simply individual preferences, and >> then to use them only as empty signs, rather than seeking to penetrate >> the inner substance of these traditions with all their contradictions >> and unrealized possibilities. To put it another way, innovation >> requires tension, an encounter with some Other that challenges the >> coordinates from which one creates--even if that Other is in fact >> found within one's own work or tradition. One key problem with much of >> today's music is that there is no inner tension, and thus nothing can >> ever really develop. Familiarity with the great musical traditions can >> help develop the sense of history and the awareness of how great music >> works, allowing one to see the inner tensions in one's own practice >> and develop them into something new. Especially key here is to examine >> how substantial innovations have occurred within the great traditions, >> to examine the practices and internal contradictions that brought >> about Beethoven, Chopin, or Charlie Parker. >> >> Ultimately, I stand by my point--the future is not to be found in new >> technologies, better interfaces, and all the rest. The future is in >> fact already here, hiding within the past and the present, but only on >> the condition that as a free human being, one has the audacity to open >> one's eyes and see it. >> >> >>> On 12/15/09 3:00 PM, "David Powers" wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. >>>> >>>> To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives >>>> me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such >>>> an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological >>>> obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any >>>> new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is >>>> difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is >>>> possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range >>>> of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might >>>> say so, even rather "amateurish". >>>> >>>> However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result >>>> of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much >>>> important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great >>>> musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian >>>> classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European >>>> classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a >>>> huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and >>>> possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, >>>> leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering >>>> the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, >>>> if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. >>>> >>>> The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel >>>> dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; >>>> it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the >>>> inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference >>>> between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's >>>> saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a >>>> sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner >>>> structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, >>>> Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's >>>> recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up >>>> the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One >>>> might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in >>>> Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an >>>> empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, >>>> the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a >>>> distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with >>>> the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order >>>> to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something >>>> which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is >>>> it just a simple pastiche of the two. >>>> >>>> In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere >>>> progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under >>>> the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event >>>> rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities >>>> for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it >>>> is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress >>>> remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the >>>> society of controlled consumption. >>>> >>>> If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps >>>> it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid >>>> of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we >>>> can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of >>>> the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the >>>> accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. >>>> >>>> ~David >>>> >>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... >>>>> >>>>> On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: >>>>> >>>>> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the >>>>> state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music >>>>> used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing realtime >>>>> manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play with >>>>> other (real?) instruments. >>>>> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, >>>>> music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >>>>> Hi! >>>>> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >>>>> >>>>> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new >>>>> music >>>>> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >>>>> the other is the death of laptop music >>>>> >>>>> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and >>>>> .microsound >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> microsound mailing list >>>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>>> >>>>> Adern X >>>>> http://www.xevor.net >>>>> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >>>>> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> microsound mailing list >>>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> microsound mailing list >>>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From tjaredfriend at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 22:27:38 2009 From: tjaredfriend at gmail.com (Jared Friend) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:27:38 -0800 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912151921y671d203csc2c0d538a3fb93e6@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> <4B28437E.30806@isjtar.org> <686ba4e40912151921y671d203csc2c0d538a3fb93e6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <686773150912151927u95583c4gb82c096f5f8d56af@mail.gmail.com> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to beatport for experimental digital music. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers wrote: > > And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at > the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here > play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for > exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great musicians > out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear > them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cyborgk at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 22:43:36 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:43:36 -0600 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686773150912151927u95583c4gb82c096f5f8d56af@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> <4B28437E.30806@isjtar.org> <686ba4e40912151921y671d203csc2c0d538a3fb93e6@mail.gmail.com> <686773150912151927u95583c4gb82c096f5f8d56af@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live performances and available recordings on the internet for more experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" even means much in the 21st century? ~David On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend wrote: > Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to beatport > for experimental digital music. > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers wrote: >> >> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at >> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here >> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for >> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great musicians >> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear >> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > From christopherjette at gmail.com Tue Dec 15 22:45:43 2009 From: christopherjette at gmail.com (christopher jette) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 19:45:43 -0800 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151200m2dd93773h6b7af70a848fccd0@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912151631w5b599598y56201af2fbb8078@mail.gmail.com> <4B28437E.30806@isjtar.org> <686ba4e40912151921y671d203csc2c0d538a3fb93e6@mail.gmail.com> <686773150912151927u95583c4gb82c096f5f8d56af@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <18b394640912151945k36845d2aj6cd49eadea77d5f0@mail.gmail.com> Might be nice if we move beyond the categories. And, I would say many have. Cheers~ Christopher On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:43 PM, David Powers wrote: > I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm > talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live > performances and available recordings on the internet for more > experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" > even means much in the 21st century? > > ~David > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend > wrote: > > Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to > beatport > > for experimental digital music. > > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers wrote: > >> > >> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at > >> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here > >> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for > >> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great musicians > >> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear > >> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > microsound mailing list > > microsound at microsound.org > > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- www.cj.lovelyweather.com christopherjette at gmail.com 617.869.3968 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From info at thesaddj.com Tue Dec 15 22:47:12 2009 From: info at thesaddj.com (Marco Donnarumma) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:47:12 +0000 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: Up for it.. M On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -- Marco Donnarumma aka The !S.A.D! Independent New Media Arts Professional, Performer, Teacher - Edinburgh, UK LAB: http://www.thesaddj.com | http://cntrl.sourceforge.net | http://www.flxer.net EVENT: http://www.liveperformersmeeting.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trommer at sympatico.ca Tue Dec 15 23:08:53 2009 From: trommer at sympatico.ca (michael trommer) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:08:53 -0500 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem to claim not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording you use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that you do. It does smack of elitism, I must say... I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes for the supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often boring, stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a overcomplicated fa?ade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream. On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" wrote: > I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm > talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live > performances and available recordings on the internet for more > experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" > even means much in the 21st century? > > ~David > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend wrote: >> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to beatport >> for experimental digital music. >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers wrote: >>> >>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at >>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here >>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for >>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great musicians >>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear >>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From cyborgk at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 00:59:58 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:59:58 -0600 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: References: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912152159s50bcb45ap4f8ff0d8980a5d2e@mail.gmail.com> First of all, the idea of "popular" music is totally misleading, because it usually refers to forms that are the result of the culture industry, and the demand for such music cannot be seperated from the "musical-industrial complex" that manufactures and markets such music. Now, if you want to talk about a form of music that did not arise out of the culture industry, such as West African tribal drumming, then we can really talk about a form of popular music (and I did in fact mention it). Second, notice how your argument tries to pin me down to some black-and-white position, when in fact what I am talking about is far more nuanced. My original example referenced "My Favorite Things," a pop tune if there ever was one, straight from the "Sound of Music." What is amazing about the Coltrane version is precisely his ability not to simply repeat the tune in some trite form, but to encounter this simple song and bring out an abstract beauty that no one could have foreseen, a beauty that seems to come from somewhere beyond this world. Coltrane engages with pop music in exactly the correct way, performing the impossible feat of evoking the blues, Jazz, African, and classical Indian music all at the same time, and with his sublime interpretation redeeming the songs' utopian potential and through his engagement creating a true musical Event. Third, even if my argument is elitist, how does that prove it wrong? If the exercise of critical reason and aesthetic judgment makes me elitist, then we need more elitists! Far worse than elitism is the old bourgeois relativism which now appears as postmodern relativism that says that everything is personal preference, no one can say anything about anything really, it's all just a matter of opinion. Not only is the end result of such a position totally nihilistic, since there can be no meaning, but the position contradicts itself; since if everything is relative, than elitism is just as valid as relativism! And to go further, there is a difference between saying that people have different tastes, and saying all taste is relative. To say that two people might disagree about the best food, where one prefers sushi and the other prefers a choice steak, is not the same as saying that since everyone has different taste, McDonald's is "just as good" as sushi and steak. Likewise, I don't deny that some will have different taste in music than me, but that in no way invalidates the idea that we can make aesthetic judgments about the quality of works. The fact that such judgments are finite and human, does means that no judgment can be "completely true," but that is a condition of being human and does not mean that we cannot make reasonably judgments as to the nature of things. I am extremely skeptical of these anti-elitist, relativist arguments, because they would seem to be nothing but the pure ideology of global capitalism; since every commodity is equal to some amount of money, every commodity is indeed relatively equal, in the fact that it can be bought and sold on the market place. In the case of music, the equality is even closer, since the price of music on itunes or a CD does not vary with the quality of the music. The fact is, arguing against elitism means arguing for a system where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, for it is this very system that produces the ideology of relativism. Those who say that all choices are relative precisely justify the suffering of those who have no choice but to take whatever they can, while the more spiritual and refined pleasures of civilization are reserved for those on top. Does it take education and the existence of time outside the realm of work to appreciate Mahler or Mingus? Then let us destroy work and increase education, rather than depriving the world Mahler and Mingus and deluding ourselves that those with little means are getting exactly what they want and deserve anyway. ~David On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:08 PM, michael trommer wrote: > I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as > blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem to claim > not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording you > use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that you do. > It does smack of elitism, I must say... > > I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes for the > supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often boring, > stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a overcomplicated > fa?ade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream. > > On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" wrote: > >> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm >> talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live >> performances and available recordings on the internet for more >> experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" >> even means much in the 21st century? >> >> ~David >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend wrote: >>> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to beatport >>> for experimental digital music. >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers wrote: >>>> >>>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at >>>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here >>>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for >>>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great musicians >>>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear >>>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From tjaredfriend at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 01:29:01 2009 From: tjaredfriend at gmail.com (Jared Friend) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:29:01 -0800 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912152159s50bcb45ap4f8ff0d8980a5d2e@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912152159s50bcb45ap4f8ff0d8980a5d2e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <686773150912152229l558dbd9bobfff2d695a97aac1@mail.gmail.com> Getting back to your initial point... You seem to think that because someone works with a digital interface, the nuance and history of traditional instruments is completely abandoned. This spits in the face of the experience I've had watching electroacoustic composers develop new instruments. Whether the composers are academically trained or self taught, the instruments strictly digital or physically informed, it's ludicrous to think that the history that is embedded in our musical experiences is abandoned when attempting to experiment in this fashion. You seem to want to paint these constructions as entirely unilateral, but I've always witnessed music creation as a reflexive process... Whether the serious composers involved are explicitly drawing from an academically induced source or second hand iterations passed on through other conscious artists, it's ludicrous to assert that the rich musical history stops dead simply because an artist chooses to engage with a process that seems foreign to you. I can create a digital instrument right now, and have countless instructors present through my vicarious exploration of the music that inspires me. The process and evolution might not be as rigid and traceable as a classically trained concert pianist, but why should it? Whether I choose to be inspired by Charles Mingus or Andrew Coltrane, I'm experiencing a rigor that is drawn from a rich musical tradition. Your resistance to one side of the coin might make your vector seem clearer, but what does that really offer? Then again... Most of the people I spend my time with listen to both Beethoven and Hair Police... Scelsi and Autechre... Dumitrescu and Major Lazer... Balance is ideal, but it's silly to generalize about a body of composers and musical pioneers that you seem to have limited exposure to. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:59 PM, David Powers wrote: > First of all, the idea of "popular" music is totally misleading, > because it usually refers to forms that are the result of the culture > industry, and the demand for such music cannot be seperated from the > "musical-industrial complex" that manufactures and markets such music. > Now, if you want to talk about a form of music that did not arise out > of the culture industry, such as West African tribal drumming, then we > can really talk about a form of popular music (and I did in fact > mention it). > > Second, notice how your argument tries to pin me down to some > black-and-white position, when in fact what I am talking about is far > more nuanced. My original example referenced "My Favorite Things," a > pop tune if there ever was one, straight from the "Sound of Music." > What is amazing about the Coltrane version is precisely his ability > not to simply repeat the tune in some trite form, but to encounter > this simple song and bring out an abstract beauty that no one could > have foreseen, a beauty that seems to come from somewhere beyond this > world. Coltrane engages with pop music in exactly the correct way, > performing the impossible feat of evoking the blues, Jazz, African, > and classical Indian music all at the same time, and with his sublime > interpretation redeeming the songs' utopian potential and through his > engagement creating a true musical Event. > > Third, even if my argument is elitist, how does that prove it wrong? > If the exercise of critical reason and aesthetic judgment makes me > elitist, then we need more elitists! Far worse than elitism is the old > bourgeois relativism which now appears as postmodern relativism that > says that everything is personal preference, no one can say anything > about anything really, it's all just a matter of opinion. Not only is > the end result of such a position totally nihilistic, since there can > be no meaning, but the position contradicts itself; since if > everything is relative, than elitism is just as valid as relativism! > > And to go further, there is a difference between saying that people > have different tastes, and saying all taste is relative. To say that > two people might disagree about the best food, where one prefers sushi > and the other prefers a choice steak, is not the same as saying that > since everyone has different taste, McDonald's is "just as good" as > sushi and steak. Likewise, I don't deny that some will have different > taste in music than me, but that in no way invalidates the idea that > we can make aesthetic judgments about the quality of works. The fact > that such judgments are finite and human, does means that no judgment > can be "completely true," but that is a condition of being human and > does not mean that we cannot make reasonably judgments as to the > nature of things. > > I am extremely skeptical of these anti-elitist, relativist arguments, > because they would seem to be nothing but the pure ideology of global > capitalism; since every commodity is equal to some amount of money, > every commodity is indeed relatively equal, in the fact that it can be > bought and sold on the market place. In the case of music, the > equality is even closer, since the price of music on itunes or a CD > does not vary with the quality of the music. The fact is, arguing > against elitism means arguing for a system where the rich get richer > and the poor get poorer, for it is this very system that produces the > ideology of relativism. Those who say that all choices are relative > precisely justify the suffering of those who have no choice but to > take whatever they can, while the more spiritual and refined pleasures > of civilization are reserved for those on top. > > Does it take education and the existence of time outside the realm of > work to appreciate Mahler or Mingus? Then let us destroy work and > increase education, rather than depriving the world Mahler and Mingus > and deluding ourselves that those with little means are getting > exactly what they want and deserve anyway. > > ~David > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:08 PM, michael trommer > wrote: > > I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as > > blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem to > claim > > not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording you > > use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that you > do. > > It does smack of elitism, I must say... > > > > I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes for > the > > supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often boring, > > stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a overcomplicated > > fa?ade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream. > > > > On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" wrote: > > > >> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm > >> talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live > >> performances and available recordings on the internet for more > >> experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" > >> even means much in the 21st century? > >> > >> ~David > >> > >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend > wrote: > >>> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to > beatport > >>> for experimental digital music. > >>> > >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at > >>>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here > >>>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for > >>>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great musicians > >>>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear > >>>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> microsound mailing list > >>> microsound at microsound.org > >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > >>> > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> microsound mailing list > >> microsound at microsound.org > >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > microsound mailing list > > microsound at microsound.org > > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thestochasticman at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 03:04:56 2009 From: thestochasticman at gmail.com (Alex Gutowski) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 02:04:56 -0600 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686773150912152229l558dbd9bobfff2d695a97aac1@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912152159s50bcb45ap4f8ff0d8980a5d2e@mail.gmail.com> <686773150912152229l558dbd9bobfff2d695a97aac1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <23bd31f10912160004s3f23b391k60f7bb301703175f@mail.gmail.com> Indeed... thinking technology is something that will not bring about great pioneering breakthroughs in music seemsto be a rather narrow-minded approach. Scoring music for different instruments and varying timbral qualities for each part can evoke a different feeling to music. Technology can have a wonderful effect on music by allowing people to design their own instruments and vary tonal qualities. As technology has progressed it has given people alternate ways of playing and giving them more options to change the tone of the sounds or samples they work with, whether it be by clipping a sample of a sitar to a minute fraction of a second, or by processing a tuba through a laptop. By playing with technology and figuring out what it can and can not do, and how to control what it does, a musician can more directly express the music they want to express. In my own forays into circuit-bending, I've found that I'm able to recreate the specific glitches/sounds/changes in tone I want not by installing a patchbay or switches, but by playing with the circuit-board directly on certain contact points; I can see why it's called circuit-bending when I play with the cheap keyboards and bend notes by varying pressure on the board. The only problem should be that people will need to develop ways to communicate with technology that suit them best. In theory, I should be able to create a controller for my bent instruments to have even more control than I do now, but until I learn more about the technology I will need to make do with what I've got. Custom computers and other progressions in technology would help to bridge the gap between what a musician wants to express and what they are able to express. On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Jared Friend wrote: > Getting back to your initial point... You seem to think that because > someone works with a digital interface, the nuance and history of > traditional instruments is completely abandoned. This spits in the face of > the experience I've had watching electroacoustic composers develop new > instruments. Whether the composers are academically trained or self taught, > the instruments strictly digital or physically informed, it's ludicrous to > think that the history that is embedded in our musical experiences is > abandoned when attempting to experiment in this fashion. You seem to want to > paint these constructions as entirely unilateral, but I've always witnessed > music creation as a reflexive process... > > Whether the serious composers involved are explicitly drawing from an > academically induced source or second hand iterations passed on through > other conscious artists, it's ludicrous to assert that the rich musical > history stops dead simply because an artist chooses to engage with a process > that seems foreign to you. I can create a digital instrument right now, and > have countless instructors present through my vicarious exploration of the > music that inspires me. The process and evolution might not be as rigid and > traceable as a classically trained concert pianist, but why should it? > Whether I choose to be inspired by Charles Mingus or Andrew Coltrane, I'm > experiencing a rigor that is drawn from a rich musical tradition. Your > resistance to one side of the coin might make your vector seem clearer, but > what does that really offer? > > Then again... Most of the people I spend my time with listen to both > Beethoven and Hair Police... Scelsi and Autechre... Dumitrescu and Major > Lazer... Balance is ideal, but it's silly to generalize about a body of > composers and musical pioneers that you seem to have limited exposure to. > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:59 PM, David Powers wrote: > >> First of all, the idea of "popular" music is totally misleading, >> because it usually refers to forms that are the result of the culture >> industry, and the demand for such music cannot be seperated from the >> "musical-industrial complex" that manufactures and markets such music. >> Now, if you want to talk about a form of music that did not arise out >> of the culture industry, such as West African tribal drumming, then we >> can really talk about a form of popular music (and I did in fact >> mention it). >> >> Second, notice how your argument tries to pin me down to some >> black-and-white position, when in fact what I am talking about is far >> more nuanced. My original example referenced "My Favorite Things," a >> pop tune if there ever was one, straight from the "Sound of Music." >> What is amazing about the Coltrane version is precisely his ability >> not to simply repeat the tune in some trite form, but to encounter >> this simple song and bring out an abstract beauty that no one could >> have foreseen, a beauty that seems to come from somewhere beyond this >> world. Coltrane engages with pop music in exactly the correct way, >> performing the impossible feat of evoking the blues, Jazz, African, >> and classical Indian music all at the same time, and with his sublime >> interpretation redeeming the songs' utopian potential and through his >> engagement creating a true musical Event. >> >> Third, even if my argument is elitist, how does that prove it wrong? >> If the exercise of critical reason and aesthetic judgment makes me >> elitist, then we need more elitists! Far worse than elitism is the old >> bourgeois relativism which now appears as postmodern relativism that >> says that everything is personal preference, no one can say anything >> about anything really, it's all just a matter of opinion. Not only is >> the end result of such a position totally nihilistic, since there can >> be no meaning, but the position contradicts itself; since if >> everything is relative, than elitism is just as valid as relativism! >> >> And to go further, there is a difference between saying that people >> have different tastes, and saying all taste is relative. To say that >> two people might disagree about the best food, where one prefers sushi >> and the other prefers a choice steak, is not the same as saying that >> since everyone has different taste, McDonald's is "just as good" as >> sushi and steak. Likewise, I don't deny that some will have different >> taste in music than me, but that in no way invalidates the idea that >> we can make aesthetic judgments about the quality of works. The fact >> that such judgments are finite and human, does means that no judgment >> can be "completely true," but that is a condition of being human and >> does not mean that we cannot make reasonably judgments as to the >> nature of things. >> >> I am extremely skeptical of these anti-elitist, relativist arguments, >> because they would seem to be nothing but the pure ideology of global >> capitalism; since every commodity is equal to some amount of money, >> every commodity is indeed relatively equal, in the fact that it can be >> bought and sold on the market place. In the case of music, the >> equality is even closer, since the price of music on itunes or a CD >> does not vary with the quality of the music. The fact is, arguing >> against elitism means arguing for a system where the rich get richer >> and the poor get poorer, for it is this very system that produces the >> ideology of relativism. Those who say that all choices are relative >> precisely justify the suffering of those who have no choice but to >> take whatever they can, while the more spiritual and refined pleasures >> of civilization are reserved for those on top. >> >> Does it take education and the existence of time outside the realm of >> work to appreciate Mahler or Mingus? Then let us destroy work and >> increase education, rather than depriving the world Mahler and Mingus >> and deluding ourselves that those with little means are getting >> exactly what they want and deserve anyway. >> >> ~David >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:08 PM, michael trommer >> wrote: >> > I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as >> > blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem to >> claim >> > not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording you >> > use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that you >> do. >> > It does smack of elitism, I must say... >> > >> > I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes for >> the >> > supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often >> boring, >> > stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a >> overcomplicated >> > fa?ade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream. >> > >> > On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" wrote: >> > >> >> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm >> >> talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live >> >> performances and available recordings on the internet for more >> >> experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" >> >> even means much in the 21st century? >> >> >> >> ~David >> >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend >> wrote: >> >>> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to >> beatport >> >>> for experimental digital music. >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers >> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at >> >>>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here >> >>>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for >> >>>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great >> musicians >> >>>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear >> >>>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> microsound mailing list >> >>> microsound at microsound.org >> >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >>> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> microsound mailing list >> >> microsound at microsound.org >> >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > microsound mailing list >> > microsound at microsound.org >> > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -- ~Alex M. Gutowski -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinbruchel at synchron.ch Wed Dec 16 03:07:05 2009 From: steinbruchel at synchron.ch (=?ISO-8859-1?B?c3RlaW5icvxjaGVs?=) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:07:05 +0100 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: really fantastic idea to do a headcount over the list. like this i've received 65 mails with really interesting information (see below for an example). nice one! ralph. Am 15.12.09 22:50 schrieb "tkrakowiak" unter : > 1 > > 2009/12/15 Kim Cascone >> I have an idea >> headcount please? >> then I'll explain >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound -- http://www.synchron.ch .:.::.:. From picnet at urlme.net Wed Dec 16 06:11:24 2009 From: picnet at urlme.net (Mike) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:11:24 +0200 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1F6E9CE7-9CDC-4E33-B7B7-ED6AE9CC03EF@urlme.net> Experimental means the seats are full at the start and empty before the performance is over. *1 excluding the friends of the performers. Microsound or the laptop instrument as with all music must invoke a reaction, clapping in apprciation or adding to the performace the sound of coats being put on followed by shuffles coughs bemused muttering and doors opening. The audience replaced with silence. Begs the question, was the performance for the audience or the artist? Is the audience that claps at the end any different to those empty seats ? The artist performed the work in both cases. Experimental for me means learning new techniques, building input and output devices to implement the idea which often is a mistake or chance find itself. The laptop or rather tools in it are part of a processing chain driven by curiosity and a desire to match and exceed the crap thats already out there. -Mike I build ideas, others play them. On Dec 16, 2009, at 6:08, michael trommer wrote: > I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as > blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem > to claim > not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording > you > use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that > you do. > It does smack of elitism, I must say... > > I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes > for the > supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often > boring, > stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a > overcomplicated > fa?ade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream. > > On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" wrote: > >> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm >> talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live >> performances and available recordings on the internet for more >> experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of >> "experimental" >> even means much in the 21st century? >> >> ~David >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend >> wrote: >>> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to >>> beatport >>> for experimental digital music. >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm >>>> looking at >>>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here >>>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for >>>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great >>>> musicians >>>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear >>>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From simonlongo at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 07:57:26 2009 From: simonlongo at gmail.com (simon longo) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:57:26 +0000 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yeah I am in as well! Simon Longo 2009/12/16 steinbr?chel > really fantastic idea to do a headcount over the list. like this i've > received 65 mails with really interesting information (see below for an > example). > > nice one! > ralph. > > > Am 15.12.09 22:50 schrieb "tkrakowiak" unter : > > > 1 > > > > 2009/12/15 Kim Cascone > >> I have an idea > >> headcount please? > >> then I'll explain > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> microsound mailing list > >> microsound at microsound.org > >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > microsound mailing list > > microsound at microsound.org > > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -- > http://www.synchron.ch .:.::.:. > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- UK: 0044 (0) 7887561945 IT: 00393490910263 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thierrybernardgotteland at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 09:28:21 2009 From: thierrybernardgotteland at gmail.com (Thierry Bernard Gotteland) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:28:21 +0700 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I AM IN! On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:57 PM, simon longo wrote: > Yeah I am in as well! > > Simon Longo > > 2009/12/16 steinbr?chel > > really fantastic idea to do a headcount over the list. like this i've >> received 65 mails with really interesting information (see below for an >> example). >> >> nice one! >> ralph. >> >> >> Am 15.12.09 22:50 schrieb "tkrakowiak" unter : >> >> > 1 >> > >> > 2009/12/15 Kim Cascone >> >> I have an idea >> >> headcount please? >> >> then I'll explain >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> microsound mailing list >> >> microsound at microsound.org >> >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > microsound mailing list >> > microsound at microsound.org >> > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> -- >> http://www.synchron.ch .:.::.:. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > > -- > > UK: 0044 (0) 7887561945 > IT: 00393490910263 > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -- KindRegards Thierry Bernard-Gotteland Mobil:+84 935 184 913 www.tb-g.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stevericksmusic at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 11:25:47 2009 From: stevericksmusic at gmail.com (Steven Ricks) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:25:47 -0700 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <23bd31f10912160004s3f23b391k60f7bb301703175f@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912152159s50bcb45ap4f8ff0d8980a5d2e@mail.gmail.com> <686773150912152229l558dbd9bobfff2d695a97aac1@mail.gmail.com> <23bd31f10912160004s3f23b391k60f7bb301703175f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7a0414350912160825n535e76bandbf2c2d9759b2b66@mail.gmail.com> Perhaps a bit of a tangent, but the following quotes by Luciano Berio on Electronic Music, taken from the article ?*Parrrole*: Berio?s Words on Music Technology," seem (possibly) applicable to the current discussion: ?If the experience of electronic music is important, as I believe it is, its importance does not reside so much in the discovery of new sounds. It lies in the possibility that these experiences will allow the composer to extend the field of sonic phenomena and to integrate them into his musical thoughts and thus to overcome the dualistic conception of musical material.? ?New musical thought, especially when espoused via new technological means, has to be conscious of musical experience that is not new.? ?Composers who work with new means in electronic music (computers included) tend to place their pasts in parentheses . . . Sometimes, one has the impression that they let themselves be chosen by the new technologies without being able to establish, dialectically, a real rapport and a true need for them. We can in fact pass indifferently from one system to another, from one computer to another?they are ever faster, more sophisticated, more powerful, and ever smaller?without really using musically that which was there.? On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Alex Gutowski wrote: > Indeed... thinking technology is something that will not bring about great > pioneering breakthroughs in music seemsto be a rather narrow-minded > approach. Scoring music for different instruments and varying timbral > qualities for each part can evoke a different feeling to music. Technology > can have a wonderful effect on music by allowing people to design their own > instruments and vary tonal qualities. As technology has progressed it has > given people alternate ways of playing and giving them more options to > change the tone of the sounds or samples they work with, whether it be by > clipping a sample of a sitar to a minute fraction of a second, or by > processing a tuba through a laptop. By playing with technology and figuring > out what it can and can not do, and how to control what it does, a musician > can more directly express the music they want to express. In my own forays > into circuit-bending, I've found that I'm able to recreate the specific > glitches/sounds/changes in tone I want not by installing a patchbay or > switches, but by playing with the circuit-board directly on certain contact > points; I can see why it's called circuit-bending when I play with the cheap > keyboards and bend notes by varying pressure on the board. The only problem > should be that people will need to develop ways to communicate with > technology that suit them best. In theory, I should be able to create a > controller for my bent instruments to have even more control than I do now, > but until I learn more about the technology I will need to make do with what > I've got. Custom computers and other progressions in technology would help > to bridge the gap between what a musician wants to express and what they are > able to express. > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Jared Friend wrote: > >> Getting back to your initial point... You seem to think that because >> someone works with a digital interface, the nuance and history of >> traditional instruments is completely abandoned. This spits in the face of >> the experience I've had watching electroacoustic composers develop new >> instruments. Whether the composers are academically trained or self taught, >> the instruments strictly digital or physically informed, it's ludicrous to >> think that the history that is embedded in our musical experiences is >> abandoned when attempting to experiment in this fashion. You seem to want to >> paint these constructions as entirely unilateral, but I've always witnessed >> music creation as a reflexive process... >> >> Whether the serious composers involved are explicitly drawing from an >> academically induced source or second hand iterations passed on through >> other conscious artists, it's ludicrous to assert that the rich musical >> history stops dead simply because an artist chooses to engage with a process >> that seems foreign to you. I can create a digital instrument right now, and >> have countless instructors present through my vicarious exploration of the >> music that inspires me. The process and evolution might not be as rigid and >> traceable as a classically trained concert pianist, but why should it? >> Whether I choose to be inspired by Charles Mingus or Andrew Coltrane, I'm >> experiencing a rigor that is drawn from a rich musical tradition. Your >> resistance to one side of the coin might make your vector seem clearer, but >> what does that really offer? >> >> Then again... Most of the people I spend my time with listen to both >> Beethoven and Hair Police... Scelsi and Autechre... Dumitrescu and Major >> Lazer... Balance is ideal, but it's silly to generalize about a body of >> composers and musical pioneers that you seem to have limited exposure to. >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:59 PM, David Powers wrote: >> >>> First of all, the idea of "popular" music is totally misleading, >>> because it usually refers to forms that are the result of the culture >>> industry, and the demand for such music cannot be seperated from the >>> "musical-industrial complex" that manufactures and markets such music. >>> Now, if you want to talk about a form of music that did not arise out >>> of the culture industry, such as West African tribal drumming, then we >>> can really talk about a form of popular music (and I did in fact >>> mention it). >>> >>> Second, notice how your argument tries to pin me down to some >>> black-and-white position, when in fact what I am talking about is far >>> more nuanced. My original example referenced "My Favorite Things," a >>> pop tune if there ever was one, straight from the "Sound of Music." >>> What is amazing about the Coltrane version is precisely his ability >>> not to simply repeat the tune in some trite form, but to encounter >>> this simple song and bring out an abstract beauty that no one could >>> have foreseen, a beauty that seems to come from somewhere beyond this >>> world. Coltrane engages with pop music in exactly the correct way, >>> performing the impossible feat of evoking the blues, Jazz, African, >>> and classical Indian music all at the same time, and with his sublime >>> interpretation redeeming the songs' utopian potential and through his >>> engagement creating a true musical Event. >>> >>> Third, even if my argument is elitist, how does that prove it wrong? >>> If the exercise of critical reason and aesthetic judgment makes me >>> elitist, then we need more elitists! Far worse than elitism is the old >>> bourgeois relativism which now appears as postmodern relativism that >>> says that everything is personal preference, no one can say anything >>> about anything really, it's all just a matter of opinion. Not only is >>> the end result of such a position totally nihilistic, since there can >>> be no meaning, but the position contradicts itself; since if >>> everything is relative, than elitism is just as valid as relativism! >>> >>> And to go further, there is a difference between saying that people >>> have different tastes, and saying all taste is relative. To say that >>> two people might disagree about the best food, where one prefers sushi >>> and the other prefers a choice steak, is not the same as saying that >>> since everyone has different taste, McDonald's is "just as good" as >>> sushi and steak. Likewise, I don't deny that some will have different >>> taste in music than me, but that in no way invalidates the idea that >>> we can make aesthetic judgments about the quality of works. The fact >>> that such judgments are finite and human, does means that no judgment >>> can be "completely true," but that is a condition of being human and >>> does not mean that we cannot make reasonably judgments as to the >>> nature of things. >>> >>> I am extremely skeptical of these anti-elitist, relativist arguments, >>> because they would seem to be nothing but the pure ideology of global >>> capitalism; since every commodity is equal to some amount of money, >>> every commodity is indeed relatively equal, in the fact that it can be >>> bought and sold on the market place. In the case of music, the >>> equality is even closer, since the price of music on itunes or a CD >>> does not vary with the quality of the music. The fact is, arguing >>> against elitism means arguing for a system where the rich get richer >>> and the poor get poorer, for it is this very system that produces the >>> ideology of relativism. Those who say that all choices are relative >>> precisely justify the suffering of those who have no choice but to >>> take whatever they can, while the more spiritual and refined pleasures >>> of civilization are reserved for those on top. >>> >>> Does it take education and the existence of time outside the realm of >>> work to appreciate Mahler or Mingus? Then let us destroy work and >>> increase education, rather than depriving the world Mahler and Mingus >>> and deluding ourselves that those with little means are getting >>> exactly what they want and deserve anyway. >>> >>> ~David >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:08 PM, michael trommer >>> wrote: >>> > I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as >>> > blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem to >>> claim >>> > not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording >>> you >>> > use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that >>> you do. >>> > It does smack of elitism, I must say... >>> > >>> > I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes for >>> the >>> > supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often >>> boring, >>> > stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a >>> overcomplicated >>> > fa?ade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream. >>> > >>> > On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" wrote: >>> > >>> >> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm >>> >> talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live >>> >> performances and available recordings on the internet for more >>> >> experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" >>> >> even means much in the 21st century? >>> >> >>> >> ~David >>> >> >>> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend >>> wrote: >>> >>> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to >>> beatport >>> >>> for experimental digital music. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking >>> at >>> >>>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here >>> >>>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for >>> >>>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great >>> musicians >>> >>>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear >>> >>>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> microsound mailing list >>> >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> microsound mailing list >>> >> microsound at microsound.org >>> >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > microsound mailing list >>> > microsound at microsound.org >>> > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> > > > -- > > ~Alex M. Gutowski > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -- Steven Ricks www.stevericks.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kim at anechoicmedia.com Wed Dec 16 11:49:09 2009 From: kim at anechoicmedia.com (Kim Cascone) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:49:09 -0800 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 Message-ID: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> and there will be extra credit for those who can produce a score of their piece it can be a graphic score, in traditional music notation or a mix of the two ***it must be uploaded in jpg or png format*** we don't have time to convert musicXML or pdf files to a graphic format for web publishing filenames adhere to the same rules as the mp3 files From timothy.leonido at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 11:53:45 2009 From: timothy.leonido at gmail.com (Timothy Leonido) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:53:45 -0500 Subject: [microsound] Speech Analysis Question... Message-ID: Hello, I am wondering if anyone can recommend an approach to isolating sounds of speech, say vowels of a particular quality or certain fricatives. Is there a program that can take a small section of a waveform and, using this selection as a model, extract sounds of a similar quality? Ideally, reducing the waveform to silence and those selected sounds? (fricatives, formants of a certain frequency) I am currently looking at Praat and Supercollider, but if anyone can point me in a better direction... In looking for sounds of speech hesitation or disfluency, someone mentioned that I might be able to use supercollider to extract quieter sounds which are in proximity to silence... though I'm not sure how this is possible. thanks! tim -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From milan.lists at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 12:32:13 2009 From: milan.lists at gmail.com (Milan Davidovic) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:32:13 -0500 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <98b2fdd50912151548k2f500b00m90f094d20b0d747c@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> <98b2fdd50912151548k2f500b00m90f094d20b0d747c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <98b2fdd50912160932g48629d65n3124b97471ad878a@mail.gmail.com> Hi -- checked my spam filter in case a reply got trapped there; found nothing so I'm re-running the question... On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Milan Davidovic wrote: > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: >> content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > > Including human voice? Thanks. -- Milan Davidovic http://altmilan.blogspot.com From cyborgk at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 12:34:26 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:34:26 -0600 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686773150912152229l558dbd9bobfff2d695a97aac1@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912152159s50bcb45ap4f8ff0d8980a5d2e@mail.gmail.com> <686773150912152229l558dbd9bobfff2d695a97aac1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912160934l4f8bd60euc2c9e95a25036171@mail.gmail.com> "You seem to think that because someone works with a digital interface, the nuance and history of traditional instruments is completely abandoned. This spits in the face of the experience I've had watching electroacoustic composers develop new instruments." Precisely because I am not within academia, I am not aware of the kind of work of electroacoustic composers developing new instruments that you mention. I guess my follow question would be, how common is what you refer to? Is it a question of geography? It seems to me that you may be fortunate to be in an environment where there are "electroacoustic composers" who do take the musical tradition seriously, since I have never even met such a person personally. I must say that it may have to do with geography. I live in Chicago, and I am aware of the music that I have access to, music that is being presented publicly in various venues, usually art galleries in the case of the music we are referencing. I am simply observing what I am seeing, for instance, when I attend a presentation at the School of the Art Institute of "Glitch" works. Now, I may be being unfair here to judge digital music based on such a show, because these artists all probably come from a visual background. But from what I can observe, it is in fact the norm that most people working with digital technologies don't necessarily come from a musical background, and that is not a problem in itself. What is a problem is when it manifests in a certain callousness to sound, and an unwillingness to relate their sound to the musical tradition. In Chicago, besides performances coming more out of the art world, the influence of the free jazz (originally by Afro-Americans affiliated with the AACM, figures such as Roscoe Mitchell, Art Ensemble of Chicago, Muhal Richard Abrams, George Lewis, etc.) and later non-genre free improv scene, has been crucial for experimental music performance. Thus, most use of live digital electronics outside of art contexts seems to be presented within this free improv type of context. Unfortunately, most of the old school innovators are no longer here, since they all teach within universities now, and in the present day, I do find that many of these performances, AND NOT ONLY THE DIGITAL PERFORMANCES, in their quest to be "free," apparently neglect the structures and legacy of tradition, which has led to what I perceive as a certain stagnation in the sound, especially in those who precisely don't reference the jazz tradition at all any more. Anyway, if there are composers to whom my statements don't apply, this is a good thing. But unfortunately from my own experience there are a lot of practitioners of digital music who really could advance by taking a step backwards and investing some time rigorously studying a musical tradition. ~David On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Jared Friend wrote: > Getting back to your initial point... You seem to think that because someone > works with a digital interface, the nuance and history of traditional > instruments is completely abandoned. This spits in the face of the > experience I've had watching electroacoustic composers develop new > instruments. Whether the composers are academically trained or self taught, > the instruments strictly digital or physically informed, it's ludicrous to > think that the history that is embedded in our musical experiences is > abandoned when attempting to experiment in this fashion. You seem to want to > paint these constructions as entirely unilateral, but I've always witnessed > music creation as a reflexive process... > > Whether the serious composers involved are explicitly drawing from an > academically induced source or second hand iterations passed on through > other conscious artists, it's ludicrous to assert that the rich musical > history stops dead simply because an artist chooses to engage with a process > that seems foreign to you. I can create a digital instrument right now, and > have countless instructors present through my vicarious exploration of the > music that inspires me. The process and evolution might not be as rigid and > traceable as a classically trained concert pianist, but why should it? > Whether I choose to be inspired by Charles Mingus or Andrew Coltrane, I'm > experiencing a rigor that is drawn from a rich musical tradition. Your > resistance to one side of the coin might make your vector seem clearer, but > what does that really offer? > > Then again... Most of the people I spend my time with listen to both > Beethoven and Hair Police... Scelsi and Autechre... Dumitrescu and Major > Lazer... Balance is ideal, but it's silly to generalize about a body of > composers and musical pioneers that you seem to have limited exposure to. > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:59 PM, David Powers wrote: >> >> First of all, the idea of "popular" music is totally misleading, >> because it usually refers to forms that are the result of the culture >> industry, and the demand for such music cannot be seperated from the >> "musical-industrial complex" that manufactures and markets such music. >> Now, if you want to talk about a form of music that did not arise out >> of the culture industry, such as West African tribal drumming, then we >> can really talk about a form of popular music (and I did in fact >> mention it). >> >> Second, notice how your argument tries to pin me down to some >> black-and-white position, when in fact what I am talking about is far >> more nuanced. My original example referenced "My Favorite Things," a >> pop tune if there ever was one, straight from the "Sound of Music." >> What is amazing about the Coltrane version is precisely his ability >> not to simply repeat the tune in some trite form, but to encounter >> this simple song and bring out an abstract beauty that no one could >> have foreseen, a beauty that seems to come from somewhere beyond this >> world. Coltrane engages with pop music in exactly the correct way, >> performing the impossible feat of evoking the blues, Jazz, African, >> and classical Indian music all at the same time, and with his sublime >> interpretation redeeming the songs' utopian potential and through his >> engagement creating a true musical Event. >> >> Third, even if my argument is elitist, how does that prove it wrong? >> If the exercise of critical reason and aesthetic judgment makes me >> elitist, then we need more elitists! Far worse than elitism is the old >> bourgeois relativism which now appears as postmodern relativism that >> says that everything is personal preference, no one can say anything >> about anything really, it's all just a matter of opinion. Not only is >> the end result of such a position totally nihilistic, since there can >> be no meaning, but the position contradicts itself; since if >> everything is relative, than elitism is just as valid as relativism! >> >> And to go further, there is a difference between saying that people >> have different tastes, and saying all taste is relative. To say that >> two people might disagree about the best food, where one prefers sushi >> and the other prefers a choice steak, is not the same as saying that >> since everyone has different taste, McDonald's is "just as good" as >> sushi and steak. Likewise, I don't deny that some will have different >> taste in music than me, but that in no way invalidates the idea that >> we can make aesthetic judgments about the quality of works. The fact >> that such judgments are finite and human, does means that no judgment >> can be "completely true," but that is a condition of being human and >> does not mean that we cannot make reasonably judgments as to the >> nature of things. >> >> I am extremely skeptical of these anti-elitist, relativist arguments, >> because they would seem to be nothing but the pure ideology of global >> capitalism; since every commodity is equal to some amount of money, >> every commodity is indeed relatively equal, in the fact that it can be >> bought and sold on the market place. In the case of music, the >> equality is even closer, since the price of music on itunes or a CD >> does not vary with the quality of the music. The fact is, arguing >> against elitism means arguing for a system where the rich get richer >> and the poor get poorer, for it is this very system that produces the >> ideology of relativism. Those who say that all choices are relative >> precisely justify the suffering of those who have no choice but to >> take whatever they can, while the more spiritual and refined pleasures >> of civilization are reserved for those on top. >> >> Does it take education and the existence of time outside the realm of >> work to appreciate Mahler or Mingus? Then let us destroy work and >> increase education, rather than depriving the world Mahler and Mingus >> and deluding ourselves that those with little means are getting >> exactly what they want and deserve anyway. >> >> ~David >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:08 PM, michael trommer >> wrote: >> > I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as >> > blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem to >> > claim >> > not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording you >> > use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that you >> > do. >> > It does smack of elitism, I must say... >> > >> > I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes for >> > the >> > supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often >> > boring, >> > stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a >> > overcomplicated >> > fa?ade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream. >> > >> > On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" wrote: >> > >> >> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm >> >> talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live >> >> performances and available recordings on the internet for more >> >> experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" >> >> even means much in the 21st century? >> >> >> >> ~David >> >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend >> >> wrote: >> >>> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to >> >>> beatport >> >>> for experimental digital music. >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at >> >>>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here >> >>>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for >> >>>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great >> >>>> musicians >> >>>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear >> >>>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> microsound mailing list >> >>> microsound at microsound.org >> >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >>> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> microsound mailing list >> >> microsound at microsound.org >> >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > microsound mailing list >> > microsound at microsound.org >> > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > From traktorman at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 12:44:04 2009 From: traktorman at gmail.com (tkrakowiak) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:44:04 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: really fantastic idea to do a headcount over the list. like this i've > received 65 mails with really interesting information (see below for an > example). > > nice one! > ralph. > > > it might be an essential part of the project? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gregpond at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 12:50:34 2009 From: gregpond at gmail.com (Greg Pond) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:50:34 -0600 Subject: [microsound] Speech Analysis Question... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <94e4b7b30912160950o1350f3bbia7ff37bca9bc3d7e@mail.gmail.com> This was posted to the PD list just a few days ago: http://williambrent.conflations.com/mov/timbreID-vowel.mov Pure Data can likely accomplish what you are trying to do. I would check out the examples here: http://puredata.info/docs/tutorials, especially if you have not tried using it or Max/MSP before. The pd list archives and the PD forum may also yield more. best, Greg On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Timothy Leonido wrote: > Hello, > > I am wondering if anyone can recommend an approach to isolating sounds of > speech, say vowels of a particular quality or certain fricatives. Is there a > program that can take a small section of a waveform and, using this > selection as a model,? extract sounds of a similar quality? Ideally, > reducing the waveform to silence and those selected sounds? (fricatives, > formants of a certain frequency) I am currently looking at Praat and > Supercollider, but if anyone can point me in a better direction... > > In looking for sounds of speech hesitation or disfluency, someone mentioned > that I might be able to use supercollider to extract quieter sounds which > are in proximity to silence... though I'm not sure how this is possible. > thanks! > > tim > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > From mis at artengine.ca Wed Dec 16 13:25:05 2009 From: mis at artengine.ca (Michal Seta) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:25:05 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:44 PM, tkrakowiak wrote: > it might be an essential part of the project? if it wasn't before, it is now :) I propose, for next time, *everyone* responds, be it a yeah or nay or maybe. And then follow up if one changes one's mind or feels inclined to justify his/her position. Great idea for a project, BTW. Too bad no one will actually splice magnetic tape. ./MiS From hellomynameisphil+mcrsnd at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 13:29:13 2009 From: hellomynameisphil+mcrsnd at gmail.com (Phil Thomson) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:29:13 -0800 Subject: [microsound] Speech Analysis Question... In-Reply-To: <94e4b7b30912160950o1350f3bbia7ff37bca9bc3d7e@mail.gmail.com> References: <94e4b7b30912160950o1350f3bbia7ff37bca9bc3d7e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: fscape has a utility that can split a sound into chunks of user-defined length, analyze and compare the chunks and then arrange the chunks according to their similarity in a certain regard, for example, amplitude or noisiness. It may not do exactly what you want it to do, but still might be useful to try or to generate ideas. That's what i can think of off the top of my head. ~pt On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Greg Pond wrote: > This was posted to the PD list just a few days ago: > http://williambrent.conflations.com/mov/timbreID-vowel.mov > > Pure Data can likely accomplish what you are trying to do. I would > check out the examples here: http://puredata.info/docs/tutorials, > especially if you have not tried using it or Max/MSP before. The pd > list archives and the PD forum may also yield more. > > best, > > Greg > > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Timothy Leonido > wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I am wondering if anyone can recommend an approach to isolating sounds of >> speech, say vowels of a particular quality or certain fricatives. Is there a >> program that can take a small section of a waveform and, using this >> selection as a model,? extract sounds of a similar quality? Ideally, >> reducing the waveform to silence and those selected sounds? (fricatives, >> formants of a certain frequency) I am currently looking at Praat and >> Supercollider, but if anyone can point me in a better direction... >> >> In looking for sounds of speech hesitation or disfluency, someone mentioned >> that I might be able to use supercollider to extract quieter sounds which >> are in proximity to silence... though I'm not sure how this is possible. >> thanks! >> >> tim >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- "'Experimental' means the seats are full at the start and empty before the performance is over." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Phil Thomson ~ http://philthomson.ca/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From the.apx at libero.it Wed Dec 16 13:45:07 2009 From: the.apx at libero.it (Adern X) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:45:07 +0100 Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** In-Reply-To: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B280DB1.8040309@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: Sound cool (all lowercase of course :-)) Count me in, A.X Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 23:29, Kim Cascone ha scritto: > .microsound community project: microacoustic music > > what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? > is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into > using acoustic musical instruments? > what is the sound of microacoustic music? > let's find out > each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic > music sounds like to them > > > GUIDELINES: > > - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum > > - deadline: February 1 2010 > > - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces > (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and > have ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! > content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments > with NO processing other than the following: > - mixing/layering > - editing (cut 'n paste) > - slowing down or speeding up > - filtering/EQ > > instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a > sax mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use > extended techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then > (de)composed in editing > > files should be placed here: > > http://www.microsound.org/repository/ > > there is also a link on the microsound.org front page > > ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload > files > > the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers > > if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to > update the list > (has to be done by hand IIRC) > > ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be > taken down___ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound Adern X http://www.xevor.net http://www.myspace.com/adernx "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From the.apx at libero.it Wed Dec 16 13:48:00 2009 From: the.apx at libero.it (Adern X) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:48:00 +0100 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B27FFFC.10408@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <1904F1D9-9610-4475-96A0-F3AF1D9067C0@libero.it> 10, A.X Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 22:30, Kim Cascone ha scritto: > I have an idea > headcount please? > then I'll explain > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound Adern X http://www.xevor.net http://www.myspace.com/adernx "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mail at jaime-munarriz.jazztel.es Wed Dec 16 13:50:56 2009 From: mail at jaime-munarriz.jazztel.es (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jaime_Mun=E1rriz_Ortiz?=) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:50:56 +0100 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: <4B292C10.3000505@jaime-munarriz.jazztel.es> mmm, nice and intriguing! From technohead3d at googlemail.com Wed Dec 16 13:57:58 2009 From: technohead3d at googlemail.com (Adam Davis) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 18:57:58 +0000 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> Shall be doing that also! 2009/12/16 Kim Cascone > and there will be extra credit for those who can produce a score of their > piece > > it can be a graphic score, in traditional music notation or a mix of the > two > > ***it must be uploaded in jpg or png format*** > we don't have time to convert musicXML or pdf files to a graphic format for > web publishing > > filenames adhere to the same rules as the mp3 files > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trommer at sympatico.ca Wed Dec 16 14:24:06 2009 From: trommer at sympatico.ca (trommer at sympatico.ca) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:24:06 +0000 Subject: [microsound] Speech Analysis Question... In-Reply-To: References: , <94e4b7b30912160950o1350f3bbia7ff37bca9bc3d7e@mail.gmail.com>, Message-ID: there's something (which is free) called praat, which is billed as 'doing phonetics by computer': http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/ > From: hellomynameisphil+mcrsnd at gmail.com > Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 10:29:13 -0800 > To: microsound at microsound.org > Subject: Re: [microsound] Speech Analysis Question... > > fscape has a utility that can split a sound into chunks of > user-defined length, analyze and compare the chunks and then arrange > the chunks according to their similarity in a certain regard, for > example, amplitude or noisiness. It may not do exactly what you want > it to do, but still might be useful to try or to generate ideas. > That's what i can think of off the top of my head. > > ~pt > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Greg Pond wrote: > > This was posted to the PD list just a few days ago: > > http://williambrent.conflations.com/mov/timbreID-vowel.mov > > > > Pure Data can likely accomplish what you are trying to do. I would > > check out the examples here: http://puredata.info/docs/tutorials, > > especially if you have not tried using it or Max/MSP before. The pd > > list archives and the PD forum may also yield more. > > > > best, > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Timothy Leonido > > wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> I am wondering if anyone can recommend an approach to isolating sounds of > >> speech, say vowels of a particular quality or certain fricatives. Is there a > >> program that can take a small section of a waveform and, using this > >> selection as a model, extract sounds of a similar quality? Ideally, > >> reducing the waveform to silence and those selected sounds? (fricatives, > >> formants of a certain frequency) I am currently looking at Praat and > >> Supercollider, but if anyone can point me in a better direction... > >> > >> In looking for sounds of speech hesitation or disfluency, someone mentioned > >> that I might be able to use supercollider to extract quieter sounds which > >> are in proximity to silence... though I'm not sure how this is possible. > >> thanks! > >> > >> tim > >> _______________________________________________ > >> microsound mailing list > >> microsound at microsound.org > >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > microsound mailing list > > microsound at microsound.org > > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > > > -- > "'Experimental' means the seats are full at the start and empty before > the performance is over." > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ~ Phil Thomson > ~ http://philthomson.ca/ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tobiasreber at sunrise.ch Wed Dec 16 15:05:15 2009 From: tobiasreber at sunrise.ch (Tobias Reber) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:05:15 +0100 Subject: [microsound] Caleb Kelly's "Cracked Media" - or: how not to write a book In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1E631DC2-8DC2-4479-8B81-487AE514B735@sunrise.ch> dear microsounders, here's a personal review of "Cracked Media" by Caleb Kelly (MIT Press, 2009) written for the .microsound mailing list by Tobias Reber Caleb Kelly's book "Cracked Media" (MIT Press, 2009) is a book I had been looking forward to since reading about it in spring 2009, and which takes on a topic that has - as far as I know - not been tackled in book form before - that of musicians' and sound artists's misuse of audio technology in the 20th and early 21st century. Now, while having provided me with s couple of details about certain artists' body of work, the book has done nothing but leave me frustrated. Despite providing a detailed table of content and an outline of the book, it takes Kelly almost 300 pages (p.274) to begin formulating original thought and to ask relevant questions. Before that, and mostly after that, the book does nothing more than provide a whole heap of historical data which can mostly be found in pre-existing sources (as Kelly himself admits, there is plenty of writing about e.g. Marclay). Apart from showcasing some australian artistis (Kelly is australian) working with vinyl or turntables, nothing essentially new is said about the featured artists that goes beyond detailing their part in a seemingly logical progression in sound media experimentation. What's more, key points of Kelly's narration are scattered an repeated almost randomly throughout all sections, not just the one which was designated for the topic. Formally, too, the book is a mess. The 250 pages of re-counting of history is front by an introduction to noise theory in the arts, drawing on Douglas Kahn, Jacques Attali and Jonathan Sterne's "The Audible Past" (Duke University Press, 2003 - highly recommended). In the fourth chapter, as questions such as "Why cracking media?" begin to trickle in, Kelly illustrates de Certeaus "tactics of the everyday" in relation to cracked media. This is in itself the most original contribution to the book, even if most of what's written has been mentioned along the way in earlyer sections. And it makes me want to read de Certeau. The book never comes close to developing a plausible thesis or to pointing, as Chapter 4 initiall promises, towards a possible future of the practice. The language in which the book is written is often vague about important points, stale and full of music journalism clich?s. Example: the oh-so-descriptive "pop, tick, skip and glitch" (page 295) word collection is varied endlessly throughout the book, and whole sentences are repeated almost word for word, sometimes on the same page (e.g. 265). Example: "Making use of 'clever tricks', practitioners of cracked media exploit their tools outside of their everyday strategic uses" (292). One of the more extreme examples is listed a the end of this e-Mail. Or this way of beginning sentence (or three, that is): "Lesser is happy to hear the CD glitch documented, without additional input from himself and without making the tracks into songs or pieces. Lesser lets the sound of the stressed CD system be itself - more akin to John Cage's approach than the digital audio scene. Lesser here is closer to Yasunao Tone than he is to Oval." (pages 278/279)On another occasion (page 265), accomplishments are attested to Oval which have earlier (page 227) been said about Yasunao Tone. Plus, the book is riddled with typos unlike any book i've ever read. Now, the pencil scribbles, which as usually accompanied my reading of the book, have turned from notes into criticism of the text. So I have plenty of bonus criticism which can be provided, should anybody decidedly object with my mercyless bashing. As a small christmas treat i have included below a list of sentences the author uses to circumscribe the focus of sound artist Yasunao Tone's work (by the way: suggested reading "Yasunao Tone. Noise Media Language" incl. CD, Errant Bodies Press 2007). Striking, isn't it? I wonder how MIT would release a text which is so obviously unfinished (author), so badly edited (editor) and oviously not proof-read. The grim ironic thought that all the noise and repetition might be an attempt to let the book's content fiddle with its form sadly doesn't help. As the book's topic is at the core of microsound practice, I'm sure some will have read the book, and I'd be glad if this personal take at judging the book would provoke some responses or even start a discussion about writing on this topic. Tobias Reber Biel, Switzerland December 16, 2009 ... and now for the christmas list (note the page numbers). page 211 Yasunao Tone ... heard these digital sounds as ripe for exploitation toward sound expansion, indeterminate composition, ... 211/212 Tone's interest in chance and the singularity of the performative situation... 212 Tone ... has a longstanding interest in indeterminate composition. 218 Whereas Tone and Collins are interested in indeterminate compositional practices... 227 ...extremely close to the technique used by Yasunao Tone to produce his indeterminate compositions... 227 (title) Yasunao Tone's Wounded Compact Discs: From Improvisation and Indeterminate Composition to Glitching CDs 227 Yasunao Tone is a Japanese experimental musician with a substantial history of practice. Although his use of indeterminate techniques dates back to the early 1960s, he is also at the forefront of the current interest in glitches, cracks, and unstable systems for sound production, all of which use a measure of indeterminacy and chance. 227 Tone's compositions are harsh in their intensity and volume but are also compelling in their radical use of indeterminacy to generate unexpected outcomes. He came across the CD glitch in 1984, and has since included it as a ...element in his composition and performance work. 232 Tone ... continues to be active in the arts scene. He has composed a number of pieces utilizing indeterminate composition for the Merce Cunningham Dance Company. 232 Tone's early work of the 1960s was heavily involved in indeterminate composition... 233 Tone's work since the 1960s has focused on exploring various methods that introduce random events and indeterminate compositional techniques into live performance. 242 Tone, although mostly interested in live performance practice... 242 The piece now met the conditions that interested Tone in performance, those of indeterminacy and chance. 242 In this sense, the piece is indeterminate as Tone has final control not of the outcome of its performance, only of its limits. 243 Tone has been involved in contemporary compositional practice since the early 1960s. His work has much in common with contemporary digital music practices and his work is appreciated within a contemporary new media context, as is evidenced by his Golden Nica award. 243 Tone's practice thus traverses a number of important periods in experimental sound practices... It is through his interest in indeterminate composition and the digital error in CD playback... 245 Like Tone, Nicolas Collins's approach to technology and his use of CD players shows and interest in indeterminacy, chance, and the accident. 280 The process for Tone is bound up in his ongoing interest in chance and indeterminate techniques in composition. 291 Yasunao Tone takes a CD ... and attaches tape to its surface... to create an indeterminate performance. 295 Yasunao Tone's "Wounded CDs," for example, form both the sound content and the indeterminate structure of his performances. --- Tobias Reber : musician / sound designer Tobias Reber Freiburgstrasse 32 2503 Biel Switzerland mobile: ++41 (0)79 573 11 69 email: tobiasreber at sunrise.ch www.myspace.com/stereorabbi From phonurgia at wanadoo.fr Wed Dec 16 15:11:25 2009 From: phonurgia at wanadoo.fr (Phonurgia Nova) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 21:11:25 +0100 Subject: [microsound] and the winners are... )))) Message-ID: Ca y est Les Prix Phonurgia Nova 2009 viennent d??tre attribu?s ce week-end au terme d?un marathon de pr?s de 12h d'?coute. Le Prix d?art sonore a ?t? d?cern? ? l'Argentin Joaquin Cofreces (www.joaquincofreces.com) pour sa pi?ce ? The last Voice ?. Cette oeuvre ramass?e de 7 minutes compose une ronde autour de la disparition d?une langue d?Am?rique latine dont on entend le dernier locuteur vivant. Les sons sont tr?s beaux, c?est onirique, ?a parle une langue inconnue, disparue. Elle a r?uni les suffrages d'une grosse majorit? du jury de douze personnes (1). Une mention a ?galement ?t? attribu?e ? une pi?ce plus longue -50 minutes- ? Arcoparlante ? de l?italien (r?sidant ? Berlin) Alessandro Bosetti (www.melgun.net) pour l?exp?rimentation ? laquelle l?auteur se livre sur le medium. Il est en effet parti de fragments sonores et d?interf?rences magn?tiques pr?lev?es sur les ondes courtes, qu?il a diffus?es sur l?antenne de Deutschlandradio Kultur demandant aux auditeurs de les d?coder et de les traduire en mots, g?n?rant ainsi une suite de petites transcriptions, d?formations, qu?il a ensuite juxtapos?es, mises en boucle pour composer un tableau verbal polyglotte tr?s convainquant. Le Prix D?couverte Pierre Schaeffer, cr?? cette ann?e et dot? de 1000 euros ? l?initiative de Bernadette Johnson (laur?ate du Prix Phonurgia Nova 2008) ? destination des jeunes auteurs de moins de 30 ans, est partag? entre trois auteurs (22 avaient concouru, 6 avaient ?t? s?lectionn?s) : Caroline Bastin (?l?ve de l?Insas, Bruxelles), signe un int?ressant et tr?s libre documentaire sur les ?migr?s italiens du charbon dans la Belgique des ann?es 50, ? Casa Nostra ? ; Elise Andrieu (avec ? Parmi les oiseaux ?, une production des Pieds sur Terre de France Culture ), a s?duit par ses prises de son de terrain et sa capacit? ? ?tablir une relation d??coute peu commune avec ses personnages ; Sebastian Peter (?tudiant ? l?Universit? Bauhaus de Weimar), dont la fiction ? Tophane ?, ?labor?e ? l?allemande ?c?est ? dire en utilisant largement le spectre des possibles du sonore- rappelle utilement que la cr?ation radiophonique peut faire coexister parole/personnage et ?v?nements sonores de toute nature. M?me si l?approche a pu para?tre d?routante de prime abord, la non cat?gorisation des productions en comp?tition (documentaire, art acoustique, fiction) a permis de s?affranchir de d?bats acad?miques sur la d?finition des genres pour se concentrer sur la recherche de formes (a priori plus modernes) qui enjambent les cat?gories et ?chappent aux classements habituels. Le Prix Nouveaux M?dias, lui, n?a pas ?t? attribu? - faute d?avoir trouv?? chaussure ? son pied ? Outre ce Palmar?s, notre partenaire Lib?ration a souhait? mettre en avant 4 autres t?moins de l?art sonore et radiophonique d?aujourd?hui, que vous pouvez entendre sur Lib?Labo (www.liberation.fr/culture/06011513-media) Plus d'infos : www.phonurgianova.blog.lemonde.fr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kim at anechoicmedia.com Wed Dec 16 15:38:31 2009 From: kim at anechoicmedia.com (Kim Cascone) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:38:31 -0800 Subject: [microsound] a periodic reminder Message-ID: <4B294547.8050201@anechoicmedia.com> please people this list is not meant for announcing anything except new works you want to share with the community and/or get feedback on please please please read the frickin' statement in BIG RED LETTERS on the same page you happened to sub from? it is all right there is painfully unsubtle text screaming at you in bold red: DO NOT POST ANNOUNCEMENTS TO THE MAIN MICROSOUND LIST!!! there is another list for this which you can sub to and announce and cross-post to From technohead3d at googlemail.com Wed Dec 16 15:39:50 2009 From: technohead3d at googlemail.com (Adam Davis) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:39:50 +0000 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> Question: Are autopan, gate and downsampling acceptable forms of processing for this project? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noisesmith at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 17:04:23 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:04:23 -0800 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> Adam Davis wrote: > Question: Are autopan, gate and downsampling acceptable forms of processing > for this project? > > Good point. Also, what about selecting a mic or sound card to record with specifically for the way it colors the sound? Overpowering the mic? A mic with a damaged membrane? Moving a powerful magnet near the mic cable while recording? Recording in spaces with unusual or "unnatural" resonant characteristics? Unconventional mic placement? Recording without equalization or compression? Failure to record in an acoustically dead space and use the typical measure of electronic reverb? I think the standard set of rules for recording of "acoustic" music state that pre or post processing that makes the sound seem cleaner or more natural is obligatory. Absence of processing typically gives you the "low fi" sound, which is just another genre of hybrid electronic music. It's kind of like how you don't look a real live human on TV unless you have a solid pancake of makeup on your face. From cyborgk at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 17:18:39 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:18:39 -0600 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912161418q376c7200sd993c5ae96a2266c@mail.gmail.com> I don't know, all the classic Blue Note records were two mics straight to tape. I don't think they sound "lo-fi" per se. So, I think that you don't need a large amount of pre or post processing. And honestly, I don't think eq and compression as pre (as opposed to post) processing is a good idea for acoustic music personally, unless you really know what you are doing. When an engineer tried to do that on my last recording, he almost ruined the drums trying to give it "character". My friend who mixed it down couldn't understand why he didn't just record it clean... Now your point about the acoustic space and the mic placement is well taken. However, the space is a consideration in all acoustic music, not just recorded music, and mic placement to some extent is equivalent to the position of the spectator at a performance. So the only question is that of the mics themselves, which for most of us probably comes down to, "use what you've got." I personally will have to borrow one. ~David On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote: > Adam Davis wrote: >> ?Question: Are autopan, gate and downsampling acceptable forms of processing >> for this project? >> >> > > Good point. Also, what about selecting a mic or sound card to record with specifically for the way it colors the sound? Overpowering the mic? A mic with a damaged membrane? Moving a powerful magnet near the mic cable while recording? Recording in spaces with unusual or "unnatural" resonant characteristics? Unconventional mic placement? Recording without equalization or compression? Failure to record in an acoustically dead space and use the typical measure of electronic reverb? > > I think the standard set of rules for recording of "acoustic" music state that pre or post processing that makes the sound seem cleaner or more natural is obligatory. Absence of processing typically gives you the "low fi" sound, which is just another genre of hybrid electronic music. It's kind of like how you don't look a real live human on TV unless you have a solid pancake of makeup on your face. > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From noisesmith at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 17:29:43 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:29:43 -0800 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912161418q376c7200sd993c5ae96a2266c@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> <686ba4e40912161418q376c7200sd993c5ae96a2266c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B295F57.4050905@gmail.com> The Blue Note recordings were done on outdated equipment with far from a flat frequency response. To get that sound today you would use some kind of preamp or processor, modern equipment is too accurate in general and would sound overly harsh without some processing. David Powers wrote: > I don't know, all the classic Blue Note records were two mics straight > to tape. I don't think they sound "lo-fi" per se. So, I think that you > don't need a large amount of pre or post processing. And honestly, I > don't think eq and compression as pre (as opposed to post) processing > is a good idea for acoustic music personally, unless you really know > what you are doing. When an engineer tried to do that on my last > recording, he almost ruined the drums trying to give it "character". > My friend who mixed it down couldn't understand why he didn't just > record it clean... > > Now your point about the acoustic space and the mic placement is well > taken. However, the space is a consideration in all acoustic music, > not just recorded music, and mic placement to some extent is > equivalent to the position of the spectator at a performance. So the > only question is that of the mics themselves, which for most of us > probably comes down to, "use what you've got." I personally will have > to borrow one. > > ~David > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Justin Glenn Smith > wrote: >> Adam Davis wrote: >>> Question: Are autopan, gate and downsampling acceptable forms of processing >>> for this project? >>> >>> >> Good point. Also, what about selecting a mic or sound card to record with specifically for the way it colors the sound? Overpowering the mic? A mic with a damaged membrane? Moving a powerful magnet near the mic cable while recording? Recording in spaces with unusual or "unnatural" resonant characteristics? Unconventional mic placement? Recording without equalization or compression? Failure to record in an acoustically dead space and use the typical measure of electronic reverb? >> >> I think the standard set of rules for recording of "acoustic" music state that pre or post processing that makes the sound seem cleaner or more natural is obligatory. Absence of processing typically gives you the "low fi" sound, which is just another genre of hybrid electronic music. It's kind of like how you don't look a real live human on TV unless you have a solid pancake of makeup on your face. >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From milan.lists at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 17:31:59 2009 From: milan.lists at gmail.com (Milan Davidovic) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 17:31:59 -0500 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <4B295F57.4050905@gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> <686ba4e40912161418q376c7200sd993c5ae96a2266c@mail.gmail.com> <4B295F57.4050905@gmail.com> Message-ID: <98b2fdd50912161431n6244a9fpbbd7af6df5f8b41b@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote: > The Blue Note recordings were done on outdated equipment with far from a flat frequency response. To get that sound today you would use some kind of preamp or processor, modern equipment is too accurate in general and would sound overly harsh without some processing. Aside from liner notes, is there anything online where we can go and read more on this? Thanks. -- Milan Davidovic http://altmilan.blogspot.com From cyborgk at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 17:40:37 2009 From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:40:37 -0600 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <4B295F57.4050905@gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> <686ba4e40912161418q376c7200sd993c5ae96a2266c@mail.gmail.com> <4B295F57.4050905@gmail.com> Message-ID: <686ba4e40912161440q22399d9drf4320f158504ff0d@mail.gmail.com> That's interesting thanks for that info -- I'm no recording engineer, and was not aware that modern equipment would actually create a harsher sound. Maybe that's something in favor of lo-fi then... But, this may be a naive question, why would a flat response microphone recording a saxophone sound harsher than the same sound if I'm listening to it standing next to the saxophone? Or is it just because the mic is normally much closer than the ear? ~DP On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote: > The Blue Note recordings were done on outdated equipment with far from a flat frequency response. To get that sound today you would use some kind of preamp or processor, modern equipment is too accurate in general and would sound overly harsh without some processing. > > David Powers wrote: >> I don't know, all the classic Blue Note records were two mics straight >> to tape. I don't think they sound "lo-fi" per se. So, I think that you >> don't need a large amount of pre or post processing. And honestly, I >> don't think eq and compression as pre (as opposed to post) processing >> is a good idea for acoustic music personally, unless you really know >> what you are doing. When an engineer tried to do that on my last >> recording, he almost ruined the drums trying to give it "character". >> My friend who mixed it down couldn't understand why he didn't just >> record it clean... >> >> Now your point about the acoustic space and the mic placement is well >> taken. However, the space is a consideration in all acoustic music, >> not just recorded music, and mic placement to some extent is >> equivalent to the position of the spectator at a performance. So the >> only question is that of the mics themselves, which for most of us >> probably comes down to, "use what you've got." I personally will have >> to borrow one. >> >> ~David >> >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Justin Glenn Smith >> wrote: >>> Adam Davis wrote: >>>> ?Question: Are autopan, gate and downsampling acceptable forms of processing >>>> for this project? >>>> >>>> >>> Good point. Also, what about selecting a mic or sound card to record with specifically for the way it colors the sound? Overpowering the mic? A mic with a damaged membrane? Moving a powerful magnet near the mic cable while recording? Recording in spaces with unusual or "unnatural" resonant characteristics? Unconventional mic placement? Recording without equalization or compression? Failure to record in an acoustically dead space and use the typical measure of electronic reverb? >>> >>> I think the standard set of rules for recording of "acoustic" music state that pre or post processing that makes the sound seem cleaner or more natural is obligatory. Absence of processing typically gives you the "low fi" sound, which is just another genre of hybrid electronic music. It's kind of like how you don't look a real live human on TV unless you have a solid pancake of makeup on your face. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From noisesmith at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 17:44:43 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:44:43 -0800 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <98b2fdd50912161431n6244a9fpbbd7af6df5f8b41b@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> <686ba4e40912161418q376c7200sd993c5ae96a2266c@mail.gmail.com> <4B295F57.4050905@gmail.com> <98b2fdd50912161431n6244a9fpbbd7af6df5f8b41b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B2962DB.2090606@gmail.com> http://www.allaboutjazz.com/php/musician.php?id=11021 http://www.jordansmusicstudio.com/jms/recording/rudy-van-gelder.shtml Rudy Van Gelder is probably the guy who you are looking for info about. The fact that they are coloring the audio intentionally is talked around more than talked about. For example when he talks about how accurately the equipment captured the sound of the performance, but the very same equipment did a terrible job of reproducing the recording. Simple logic tells us they are not using a conventional meaning of the word "accuracy" here. Milan Davidovic wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Justin Glenn Smith > wrote: >> The Blue Note recordings were done on outdated equipment with far from a flat frequency response. To get that sound today you would use some kind of preamp or processor, modern equipment is too accurate in general and would sound overly harsh without some processing. > > Aside from liner notes, is there anything online where we can go and > read more on this? > > Thanks. > From djdualcore at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 17:45:59 2009 From: djdualcore at gmail.com (Neil Clopton) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:45:59 -0600 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? Message-ID: <535a89520912161445v686b6381k663926887e36a2ef@mail.gmail.com> > Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:25:05 -0500 > From: Michal Seta > To: microsound at microsound.org > Subject: > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > [snip] > Great idea for a project, BTW. Too bad no one will actually splice > magnetic tape. > I'm sure I could find a splicing block somewhere, but having actually used one I'm not going to put myself through that again without a REALLY good reason. By the way, I recorded my son playing some really nice hand percussion on the bodies of a couple different acoustic guitars last night. It feels like an embarrassment of riches to have all of those sounds less than 24 hours into the project. -Neil -- DJ Dual Core's Blog http://oldmixtapes.blogspot.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jhopkins at tech-no-mad.net Wed Dec 16 18:02:17 2009 From: jhopkins at tech-no-mad.net (John Hopkins) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:02:17 -0700 Subject: [microsound] Caleb Kelly's "Cracked Media" - or: how not to write a book In-Reply-To: <1E631DC2-8DC2-4479-8B81-487AE514B735@sunrise.ch> References: <1E631DC2-8DC2-4479-8B81-487AE514B735@sunrise.ch> Message-ID: <4B2966F9.3000903@tech-no-mad.net> Tobias -- as a editor, the only thing I can say... > Plus, the book is riddled with typos unlike any book i've ever read. is that people who live in glass houses should never throw stones... ;-\ jh From noisesmith at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 18:10:01 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:10:01 -0800 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912161440q22399d9drf4320f158504ff0d@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> <686ba4e40912161418q376c7200sd993c5ae96a2266c@mail.gmail.com> <4B295F57.4050905@gmail.com> <686ba4e40912161440q22399d9drf4320f158504ff0d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B2968C9.70607@gmail.com> I am not an engineer either, but I have dabbled and read a few things here and there. I think it could have to do with a smoothing of the recording (caused by poor high frequency response) compensating for harsher qualities in the gear reproducing the sound. And also the fact that the recorded medium does not nearly have the dynamic range that the human ear is capable of. For example, in order to hear the saxophone at a full normal amplitude you are either compressing the signal in order to retain clarity on the quieter moments, or gating to eliminate the quieter sounds, or introducing the distortion of an extremely low bit-depth when the sounds get quieter. As far as I know any fourth option (other than a drastically higher dynamic range) would be an improved version of compression and or gating. Electronic simulacra of sounds have a number of limitations, which we can choose as artists to compensate for with a careful concealing artifice in order to mimic natural sounds, or allow to remain as a sort of wabi-sabi trace of our human technological limitations. David Powers wrote: > That's interesting thanks for that info -- I'm no recording engineer, > and was not aware that modern equipment would actually create a > harsher sound. Maybe that's something in favor of lo-fi then... > > But, this may be a naive question, why would a flat response > microphone recording a saxophone sound harsher than the same sound if > I'm listening to it standing next to the saxophone? Or is it just > because the mic is normally much closer than the ear? > > ~DP > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Justin Glenn Smith > wrote: >> The Blue Note recordings were done on outdated equipment with far from a flat frequency response. To get that sound today you would use some kind of preamp or processor, modern equipment is too accurate in general and would sound overly harsh without some processing. >> >> David Powers wrote: >>> I don't know, all the classic Blue Note records were two mics straight >>> to tape. I don't think they sound "lo-fi" per se. So, I think that you >>> don't need a large amount of pre or post processing. And honestly, I >>> don't think eq and compression as pre (as opposed to post) processing >>> is a good idea for acoustic music personally, unless you really know >>> what you are doing. When an engineer tried to do that on my last >>> recording, he almost ruined the drums trying to give it "character". >>> My friend who mixed it down couldn't understand why he didn't just >>> record it clean... >>> >>> Now your point about the acoustic space and the mic placement is well >>> taken. However, the space is a consideration in all acoustic music, >>> not just recorded music, and mic placement to some extent is >>> equivalent to the position of the spectator at a performance. So the >>> only question is that of the mics themselves, which for most of us >>> probably comes down to, "use what you've got." I personally will have >>> to borrow one. >>> >>> ~David >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Justin Glenn Smith >>> wrote: >>>> Adam Davis wrote: >>>>> Question: Are autopan, gate and downsampling acceptable forms of processing >>>>> for this project? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Good point. Also, what about selecting a mic or sound card to record with specifically for the way it colors the sound? Overpowering the mic? A mic with a damaged membrane? Moving a powerful magnet near the mic cable while recording? Recording in spaces with unusual or "unnatural" resonant characteristics? Unconventional mic placement? Recording without equalization or compression? Failure to record in an acoustically dead space and use the typical measure of electronic reverb? >>>> >>>> I think the standard set of rules for recording of "acoustic" music state that pre or post processing that makes the sound seem cleaner or more natural is obligatory. Absence of processing typically gives you the "low fi" sound, which is just another genre of hybrid electronic music. It's kind of like how you don't look a real live human on TV unless you have a solid pancake of makeup on your face. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From tobiasreber at sunrise.ch Wed Dec 16 18:20:04 2009 From: tobiasreber at sunrise.ch (Tobias Reber) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:20:04 +0100 Subject: [microsound] Caleb Kelly's "Cracked Media" - or: how not to write a book In-Reply-To: <4B2966F9.3000903@tech-no-mad.net> References: <1E631DC2-8DC2-4479-8B81-487AE514B735@sunrise.ch> <4B2966F9.3000903@tech-no-mad.net> Message-ID: <73D0A655-C3E0-4AEB-A1E1-8E2B9BB795CD@sunrise.ch> hi john, i'm sorry - as a non-native speaker of english I have no clue what (if anything) you're alluding to. could you please explain? thanks ;-) tobias Am 17.12.2009 um 00:02 schrieb John Hopkins: > Tobias -- as a editor, the only thing I can say... > >> Plus, the book is riddled with typos unlike any book i've ever read. > > is that people who live in glass houses should never throw stones... > > ;-\ > > jh > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound --- Tobias Reber : musician / sound designer Tobias Reber Freiburgstrasse 32 2503 Biel Switzerland mobile: ++41 (0)79 573 11 69 email: tobiasreber at sunrise.ch www.myspace.com/stereorabbi From list at isjtar.org Wed Dec 16 18:57:06 2009 From: list at isjtar.org (isjtar) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:57:06 +0100 Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40912160934l4f8bd60euc2c9e95a25036171@mail.gmail.com> References: <686ba4e40912151943q4f6d2e1ducb778a2d1a34522c@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912152159s50bcb45ap4f8ff0d8980a5d2e@mail.gmail.com> <686773150912152229l558dbd9bobfff2d695a97aac1@mail.gmail.com> <686ba4e40912160934l4f8bd60euc2c9e95a25036171@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B2973D2.10401@isjtar.org> no time to go too much in depth now, but interesting experimental music is here (personally brussels) not at all limited to academia, nor electroacoustic music. there's so many people putting their heart in making experimental music, i thought that was what this list is about. and to make this music performable, to have interesting concerts, improvisation, composition, we need to make tools. and for this we experiment with technology, not neglecting history of course. but the piano for electronic music doesn't exist yet and computers help me express myself, a good interface helps and i need to code it. as for art galleries, at our arts org it is much more often the case that people with a musical background get into visual arts than the other way around. all this being said, the quality of most electronic music performances is subpar, i agree. David Powers wrote: > "You seem to think that because someone works with a digital > interface, the nuance and history of traditional instruments is > completely abandoned. This spits in the face of the experience I've > had watching electroacoustic composers develop new instruments." > > Precisely because I am not within academia, I am not aware of the kind > of work of electroacoustic composers developing new instruments that > you mention. I guess my follow question would be, how common is what > you refer to? Is it a question of geography? It seems to me that you > may be fortunate to be in an environment where there are > "electroacoustic composers" who do take the musical tradition > seriously, since I have never even met such a person personally. > > I must say that it may have to do with geography. > > I live in Chicago, and I am aware of the music that I have access to, > music that is being presented publicly in various venues, usually art > galleries in the case of the music we are referencing. I am simply > observing what I am seeing, for instance, when I attend a presentation > at the School of the Art Institute of "Glitch" works. Now, I may be > being unfair here to judge digital music based on such a show, because > these artists all probably come from a visual background. But from > what I can observe, it is in fact the norm that most people working > with digital technologies don't necessarily come from a musical > background, and that is not a problem in itself. What is a problem is > when it manifests in a certain callousness to sound, and an > unwillingness to relate their sound to the musical tradition. > > In Chicago, besides performances coming more out of the art world, the > influence of the free jazz (originally by Afro-Americans affiliated > with the AACM, figures such as Roscoe Mitchell, Art Ensemble of > Chicago, Muhal Richard Abrams, George Lewis, etc.) and later non-genre > free improv scene, has been crucial for experimental music > performance. Thus, most use of live digital electronics outside of art > contexts seems to be presented within this free improv type of > context. Unfortunately, most of the old school innovators are no > longer here, since they all teach within universities now, and in the > present day, I do find that many of these performances, AND NOT ONLY > THE DIGITAL PERFORMANCES, in their quest to be "free," apparently > neglect the structures and legacy of tradition, which has led to what > I perceive as a certain stagnation in the sound, especially in those > who precisely don't reference the jazz tradition at all any more. > > Anyway, if there are composers to whom my statements don't apply, this > is a good thing. But unfortunately from my own experience there are a > lot of practitioners of digital music who really could advance by > taking a step backwards and investing some time rigorously studying a > musical tradition. > > ~David > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Jared Friend wrote: > >> Getting back to your initial point... You seem to think that because someone >> works with a digital interface, the nuance and history of traditional >> instruments is completely abandoned. This spits in the face of the >> experience I've had watching electroacoustic composers develop new >> instruments. Whether the composers are academically trained or self taught, >> the instruments strictly digital or physically informed, it's ludicrous to >> think that the history that is embedded in our musical experiences is >> abandoned when attempting to experiment in this fashion. You seem to want to >> paint these constructions as entirely unilateral, but I've always witnessed >> music creation as a reflexive process... >> >> Whether the serious composers involved are explicitly drawing from an >> academically induced source or second hand iterations passed on through >> other conscious artists, it's ludicrous to assert that the rich musical >> history stops dead simply because an artist chooses to engage with a process >> that seems foreign to you. I can create a digital instrument right now, and >> have countless instructors present through my vicarious exploration of the >> music that inspires me. The process and evolution might not be as rigid and >> traceable as a classically trained concert pianist, but why should it? >> Whether I choose to be inspired by Charles Mingus or Andrew Coltrane, I'm >> experiencing a rigor that is drawn from a rich musical tradition. Your >> resistance to one side of the coin might make your vector seem clearer, but >> what does that really offer? >> >> Then again... Most of the people I spend my time with listen to both >> Beethoven and Hair Police... Scelsi and Autechre... Dumitrescu and Major >> Lazer... Balance is ideal, but it's silly to generalize about a body of >> composers and musical pioneers that you seem to have limited exposure to. >> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:59 PM, David Powers wrote: >> >>> First of all, the idea of "popular" music is totally misleading, >>> because it usually refers to forms that are the result of the culture >>> industry, and the demand for such music cannot be seperated from the >>> "musical-industrial complex" that manufactures and markets such music. >>> Now, if you want to talk about a form of music that did not arise out >>> of the culture industry, such as West African tribal drumming, then we >>> can really talk about a form of popular music (and I did in fact >>> mention it). >>> >>> Second, notice how your argument tries to pin me down to some >>> black-and-white position, when in fact what I am talking about is far >>> more nuanced. My original example referenced "My Favorite Things," a >>> pop tune if there ever was one, straight from the "Sound of Music." >>> What is amazing about the Coltrane version is precisely his ability >>> not to simply repeat the tune in some trite form, but to encounter >>> this simple song and bring out an abstract beauty that no one could >>> have foreseen, a beauty that seems to come from somewhere beyond this >>> world. Coltrane engages with pop music in exactly the correct way, >>> performing the impossible feat of evoking the blues, Jazz, African, >>> and classical Indian music all at the same time, and with his sublime >>> interpretation redeeming the songs' utopian potential and through his >>> engagement creating a true musical Event. >>> >>> Third, even if my argument is elitist, how does that prove it wrong? >>> If the exercise of critical reason and aesthetic judgment makes me >>> elitist, then we need more elitists! Far worse than elitism is the old >>> bourgeois relativism which now appears as postmodern relativism that >>> says that everything is personal preference, no one can say anything >>> about anything really, it's all just a matter of opinion. Not only is >>> the end result of such a position totally nihilistic, since there can >>> be no meaning, but the position contradicts itself; since if >>> everything is relative, than elitism is just as valid as relativism! >>> >>> And to go further, there is a difference between saying that people >>> have different tastes, and saying all taste is relative. To say that >>> two people might disagree about the best food, where one prefers sushi >>> and the other prefers a choice steak, is not the same as saying that >>> since everyone has different taste, McDonald's is "just as good" as >>> sushi and steak. Likewise, I don't deny that some will have different >>> taste in music than me, but that in no way invalidates the idea that >>> we can make aesthetic judgments about the quality of works. The fact >>> that such judgments are finite and human, does means that no judgment >>> can be "completely true," but that is a condition of being human and >>> does not mean that we cannot make reasonably judgments as to the >>> nature of things. >>> >>> I am extremely skeptical of these anti-elitist, relativist arguments, >>> because they would seem to be nothing but the pure ideology of global >>> capitalism; since every commodity is equal to some amount of money, >>> every commodity is indeed relatively equal, in the fact that it can be >>> bought and sold on the market place. In the case of music, the >>> equality is even closer, since the price of music on itunes or a CD >>> does not vary with the quality of the music. The fact is, arguing >>> against elitism means arguing for a system where the rich get richer >>> and the poor get poorer, for it is this very system that produces the >>> ideology of relativism. Those who say that all choices are relative >>> precisely justify the suffering of those who have no choice but to >>> take whatever they can, while the more spiritual and refined pleasures >>> of civilization are reserved for those on top. >>> >>> Does it take education and the existence of time outside the realm of >>> work to appreciate Mahler or Mingus? Then let us destroy work and >>> increase education, rather than depriving the world Mahler and Mingus >>> and deluding ourselves that those with little means are getting >>> exactly what they want and deserve anyway. >>> >>> ~David >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:08 PM, michael trommer >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I think that my issue with your argument stems from it appearing as >>>> blinkered as that which you are arguing against. Although you seem to >>>> claim >>>> not to have any bias against popular/pop/whatever music, the wording you >>>> use, the examples you put (or don't put) forth strongly suggest that you >>>> do. >>>> It does smack of elitism, I must say... >>>> >>>> I do agree that there's a great deal of crap out there - that goes for >>>> the >>>> supposed avant-garde (most of which is, in my opinion, very often >>>> boring, >>>> stuck up its own arse, and hiding its inadequacy behind a >>>> overcomplicated >>>> fa?ade of academic rhetoric), as well as the mainstream. >>>> >>>> On 12/15/09 10:43 PM, "David Powers" wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I'm not looking to Beatport for experimental digital music, I'm >>>>> talking about the mainstream in digital music... I look to live >>>>> performances and available recordings on the internet for more >>>>> experimental offerings. But I wonder if the category of "experimental" >>>>> even means much in the 21st century? >>>>> >>>>> ~David >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Jared Friend >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Maybe the crucial flaw in your argument is that you are looking to >>>>>> beatport >>>>>> for experimental digital music. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:21 PM, David Powers >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> And sorry, for my "stereotyped" idea of digital music, I'm looking at >>>>>>> the records that are selling on Beatport and that DJ's around here >>>>>>> play, and listening to some of the things I hear passing for >>>>>>> exmperimental. I'm not at all saying that there aren't great >>>>>>> musicians >>>>>>> out there. It's just that, I don't know who they are or how to hear >>>>>>> them, and they certainly aren't that easy to find. >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> microsound mailing list >>>>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> microsound mailing list >>>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > From tobiasreber at sunrise.ch Wed Dec 16 19:13:52 2009 From: tobiasreber at sunrise.ch (Tobias Reber) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 01:13:52 +0100 Subject: [microsound] Caleb Kelly's "Cracked Media" - or: how not to write a book In-Reply-To: <4B29711F.1040708@tech-no-mad.net> References: <1E631DC2-8DC2-4479-8B81-487AE514B735@sunrise.ch> <4B2966F9.3000903@tech-no-mad.net> <73D0A655-C3E0-4AEB-A1E1-8E2B9BB795CD@sunrise.ch> <4B29711F.1040708@tech-no-mad.net> Message-ID: I see. thanks for making it clear, the point is taken. ;-) i by no means meant to suggest that I myself would be better at anything Kelly and his editor(s) and publisher attempt in this book, and I hope language difficulties have not made it look as if I did. ;-) I applaud the attempt, regardless of the (in my opinion) many shortcomings. and please note that if I had actually written my review with publication at a major publishing house in mind (and not very spontaneously and for freelance posting at a mailing list), I'd have actually read it through more thoroughly and, more to the point, sent it to literate english speaking friends and maybe professional proof- readers. and I guess I should have added that I will list the typos I've spotted and send them to MIT Press for correction in future editions, as I've done with books that I really loved. but then, I have no idea what proof-reading of a book costs, or who is paying for it? maybe you could shed some light on this, or point me to some info as to how this is usually handled, especially within an academic/non-fiction context? as I tried to say towards the end of my original posting (perhaps not clearly enough as I was really frustrated with the book - i'd only finished it today): apart from just criticizing the book I'd be very happy if this could start a discussion about how the topic of Cracked Media could be tackled (in book form) in a more successful way. What might be the interesting questions? How about an anthology with several contributors? etc. tobias Am 17.12.2009 um 00:45 schrieb John Hopkins: > >>>> Plus, the book is riddled with typos unlike any book i've ever >>>> read. >>> >>> is that people who live in glass houses should never throw stones... > > This adage means someone who is critiquing some one else's behavior > should be free of the defects they are critiquing. Your critique > was full of typos (many that would be caught by any text-editing > software). > > But I'm not trying to be mean or anything -- I understand the (your) > problem of writing second-language texts -- as an editor, reading > any text full of typos is really annoying... I more thought it > mildly amusing that you pointed that out given the condition of your > own text... > > I certainly am not interested in reading that book, thanks for the > insight ;-) > > cheers, > jh > --- Tobias Reber : musician / sound designer Tobias Reber Freiburgstrasse 32 2503 Biel Switzerland mobile: ++41 (0)79 573 11 69 email: tobiasreber at sunrise.ch www.myspace.com/stereorabbi From ben at greenbeet.com Wed Dec 16 19:33:03 2009 From: ben at greenbeet.com (Ben Neill) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:33:03 -0500 Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Count me in for the new project! Ben -- Ben Neill 53 Mercer Street New York, NY 10013 www.benneill.com www.myspace.com/benneill www.myspace.com/xixnyc on 12/15/09 6:29 PM, microsound-request at or8.net at microsound-request at or8.net wrote: > Send microsound mailing list submissions to > microsound at or8.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > microsound-request at or8.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > microsound-owner at or8.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of microsound digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: anyone up for a new project? (Pereshaped) > 2. Re: anyone up for a new project? (Adam Davis) > 3. Re: ***microacoustic music project*** (Paulo Mouat) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:20:12 +0000 > From: Pereshaped > To: microsound at or8.net > Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > I'm in! > > 2009/12/15 : >> Send microsound mailing list submissions to >> ? ? ? ?microsound at or8.net >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> ? ? ? ?http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> ? ? ? ?microsound-request at or8.net >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> ? ? ? ?microsound-owner at or8.net >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of microsound digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> ? 1. Re: ***microacoustic music project*** (Neil Clopton) >> ? 2. Re: anyone up for a new project? (mat dalgleish) >> ? 3. Re: ***microacoustic music project*** (Magali Babin) >> ? 4. Re: anyone up for a new project? (justino at anihilo.com) >> ? 5. Re: anyone up for a new project? (Renato Fabbri) >> ? 6. Re: microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 6 (fdurso at comcast.net) >> ? 7. Re: post-laptop era? (michael trommer) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:38:34 -0600 >> From: Neil Clopton >> To: microsound at or8.net >> Subject: Re: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** >> Message-ID: >> ? ? ? ?<535a89520912151438t269ebc27t263afc2791c348f at mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> This is going to be SO much fun! > enthusiasm> >> >> -Neil >> -- >> DJ Dual Core's Blog >> http://oldmixtapes.blogspot.com/ >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> > -0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:41:31 +0000 >> From: mat dalgleish >> To: >> Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> I certainly am... >> >> >> >>> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:30:36 -0800 >>> From: kim at anechoicmedia.com >>> To: microsound at or8.net >>> Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? >>> >>> I have an idea >>> headcount please? >>> then I'll explain >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> Got more than one Hotmail account? Save time by linking them together >> ?http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/186394591/direct/01/ >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> > -0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:49:34 -0500 >> From: "Magali Babin" >> To: >> Subject: Re: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; >> ? ? ? ?reply-type=response >> >> i'm interested too,yes! >> m. >> >> >> >> >> >> myspace.com/magalibabin >> >> http://www.electrocd.com/fr/bio/babin_ma/ >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Kim Cascone" >> To: "microsound_list" >> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 5:29 PM >> Subject: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** >> >> >>> .microsound community project: microacoustic music >>> >>> what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? >>> is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using >>> acoustic musical instruments? >>> what is the sound of microacoustic music? >>> let's find out >>> each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music >>> sounds like to them >>> >>> >>> GUIDELINES: >>> >>> - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum >>> >>> - deadline: February 1 2010 >>> >>> - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces >>> (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have >>> ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! >>> content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments >>> with NO processing other than the following: >>> - mixing/layering >>> - editing (cut 'n paste) >>> - slowing down or speeding up >>> - filtering/EQ >>> >>> instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax >>> mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended >>> techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing >>> >>> files should be placed here: >>> >>> http://www.microsound.org/repository/ >>> >>> there is also a link on the microsound.org front page >>> >>> ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files >>> >>> the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers >>> >>> if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update >>> the list >>> (has to be done by hand IIRC) >>> >>> ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken >>> down___ >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >>> >>> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus >>> signature database 4690 (20091215) __________ >>> >>> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. >>> >>> http://www.eset.com >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:53:50 -0500 >> From: "justino at anihilo.com" >> To: microsound at or8.net >> Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? >> Message-ID: <380-2200912215225350453 at M2W128.mail2web.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 >> >> Hola Kim, >> Count me in >> paz >> jorge >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> mail2web - Check your email from the web at >> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 21:05:12 -0200 >> From: Renato Fabbri >> To: microsound at microsound.org, justino at anihilo.com >> Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? >> Message-ID: >> ? ? ? ?<1f50cb500912151505r54613dbdga33c8305141104a2 at mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> >> 5 is my number, couldn't resist it... >> >> 2009/12/15 justino at anihilo.com : >>> Hola Kim, >>> Count me in >>> paz >>> jorge >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> mail2web - Check your email from the web at >>> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Linux User #479299 >> skype: fabbri.renato >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 6 >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:14:31 +0000 (UTC) >> From: fdurso at comcast.net >> To: microsound at or8.net >> Subject: Re: [microsound] microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 6 >> Message-ID: >> ? ? ? >> ?<1229826544.397271260918871108.JavaMail.root at sz0161a.westchester.pa.mail.com >> cast.net> >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> >> I am >> >> >> Frank >> >> >> ----------------------------------- From: Kim Cascone < kim at anechoicmedia.com >> > >> To: microsound_list < microsound at or8.net > >> Subject: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? >> Message-ID: < 4B27FFFC.10408 at anechoicmedia.com > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I have an idea >> headcount please? >> then I'll explain >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> > -0001.html> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 7 >> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:15:13 -0500 >> From: michael trommer >> To: >> Subject: Re: [microsound] post-laptop era? >> Message-ID: >> Content-Type: text/plain; ? ? ? charset="US-ASCII" >> >> Re. computer with a non-computer interface - it seems to me that most >> digital gear is exactly that, be it an mpc or one of those 'workstation' >> keyboards. >> >> Re. the loss of musical traditions, I think that many >> hip-hop/glitch/house/techno artists would disagree - many would argue that >> the mpc/303/808/909 etc. is/are at the foundation of the style and sound of >> their music. >> >> Sampling as 'merely a sound effect', eh ? Wooh...there's a can of worms >> you've opened... >> >> i'd also be careful about positioning the 'old' 'real' aesthetics of a >> coltrane against the 'new' - it reminds me of when people were arguing that >> 'real' music was played on guitars (or whatever) and that anything played on >> electronic instruments wasn't 'real' music. As a kid it usually boiled down >> to a drunken argument of zeppelin vs. kraftwerk...stupid. >> >> >> On 12/15/09 3:00 PM, "David Powers" wrote: >> >>> Personally I believe that there is a problem with this hypothesis. >>> >>> To begin with, I have yet to see a human/machine interface that gives >>> me the kind of nuance that I achieve when I play piano. Even if such >>> an interface existed, when encounters the problem of technological >>> obsolescence. The lifespan of technologies is too short, and for any >>> new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. Thus, it is >>> difficult if not impossible to achieve the kind of virtuosity that is >>> possible on more traditional instruments. This in turn means the range >>> of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, or if I might >>> say so, even rather "amateurish". >>> >>> However, I am even more disturbed by a trend I see arising as a result >>> of the prevalence of digital music making: I believe that much >>> important musical knowledge is being lost. If one considers the great >>> musical traditions of the world, which for me would include Indian >>> classical, Chinese and Japanese music, West African drumming, European >>> classical, jazz, and contemporary compositional practices, there is a >>> huge range of harmonic, rhythmic, melodic, and timbral knowledge and >>> possibility available. Yet, most of this knowledge is being forgotten, >>> leading to extremely narrow musical practices. Instead of mastering >>> the structural aspects of these musics, one usually encounters them, >>> if at all, as directly sampled appropriations. >>> >>> The problem with this is that sampling (like the application of novel >>> dsp effects here and there) normally exists entirely at the surface; >>> it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". It has no impact on the >>> inner structure of a musical composition. Consider the difference >>> between the influence of Indian music on, say, John Coltrane's >>> saxophone improvisations, with a piece of music that merely samples a >>> sitar riff. The difference is obvious: by taking seriously the inner >>> structure of Indian music, and using the insights gained in this way, >>> Coltrane was able to produce a radical new musical space. Coltrane's >>> recording of "My Favorite Things" is precisely an Event, opening up >>> the space of freedom, proposing a new way of creating vibrations. One >>> might even say that at a certain level, the sitar sample is, in >>> Hegelian terms, an abstract negation of Indian music; it is simply an >>> empty signifier for an exotic Other; it refers to another tradition, >>> the better to avoid any real encounter, to keep this alien Other at a >>> distance. Coltrane's approach, on the other hand, is to wrestle with >>> the Other, not to reproduce it but to critically encounter it in order >>> to produce a synthesis that produces something really new, something >>> which is no longer just jazz, but is not Indian music either, nor is >>> it just a simple pastiche of the two. >>> >>> In conclusion, I would say that one must distinguish between mere >>> progress, which in our day and age is only the passing of time under >>> the rule of capital, and the radically new which comes as an Event >>> rupturing the structure of reality and opening up new possibilities >>> for freedom. Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it >>> is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because progress >>> remains entirely within the coordinates of the market place and the >>> society of controlled consumption. >>> >>> If we wish to really discover what is new, in art as in life, perhaps >>> it is time to take a deep breath, to step back, and to not be afraid >>> of what is considered "old-fashioned" and traditional; not so that we >>> can slavishly recreate a tradition, but in order to find the seeds of >>> the new, the possibilities for freedom that lie dormant within the >>> accumulated cultural experience of the global human society. >>> >>> ~David >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Graham Miller >>> wrote: >>>> the future is in control surfaces and human/machine interfaces... >>>> >>>> On 15-Dec-09, at 1:27 PM, Adern X wrote: >>>> >>>> IMHO in the last two years laptop moved from being a music generator to the >>>> state of a music controller. In other words, if some times ago laptop music >>>> used mostly sinewaves as input, now it seems more interesting doing >>>> realtime >>>> manipulation of samples (or somenting coming from audio inputs) or play >>>> with >>>> other (real?) instruments. >>>> The result is that it seems less "laptop-music" perhaps because, for me, >>>> music using sinewaves seems in a creative cul-de-sac. >>>> Hi! >>>> Il giorno 15/dic/09, alle ore 18:38, Kim Cascone ha scritto: >>>> >>>> over the past couple of years I've noticed interesting developments in new >>>> music >>>> one is the seemingly sudden plethora of laptop musicians >>>> the other is the death of laptop music >>>> >>>> interested in hearing opinions regarding the state of new music culture and >>>> .microsound >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> Adern X >>>> http://www.xevor.net >>>> http://www.myspace.com/adernx >>>> "Boredom is the mother of creativity" (Ron Arad) >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> microsound mailing list >>>> microsound at microsound.org >>>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> >> End of microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 9 >> ***************************************** >> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 23:22:11 +0000 > From: Adam Davis > To: microsound at microsound.org > Cc: justino at anihilo.com > Subject: Re: [microsound] anyone up for a new project? > Message-ID: > <5badef3b0912151522o673b0db9r34546253ef8a4cfb at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Yuh huh! > > 2009/12/15 Renato Fabbri > >> 5 is my number, couldn't resist it... >> >> 2009/12/15 justino at anihilo.com : >>> Hola Kim, >>> Count me in >>> paz >>> jorge >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> mail2web - Check your email from the web at >>> http://link.mail2web.com/mail2web >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> microsound mailing list >>> microsound at microsound.org >>> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Linux User #479299 >> skype: fabbri.renato >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > 0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:29:00 -0500 > From: Paulo Mouat > To: microsound at microsound.org > Subject: Re: [microsound] ***microacoustic music project*** > Message-ID: > <424ce300912151529o343c0dbbye29251bec4746b42 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > Check my 'Konzentrische' piece (link in my sig). It was all done with > acoustic instruments, recordings of which were subject to extreme speed > variations, speed fluctuation, filtering, EQ and layering (absolutely no > electronic sounds or sophisticated processing were used). It's about 17 > minutes total, though. > > > //p > http://www.interdisciplina.org/00.0 > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Kim Cascone wrote: > >> .microsound community project: microacoustic music >> >> what is .microsound? what will it sound like in 10 years time? >> is it purely music made via digital means or can it shape shift into using >> acoustic musical instruments? >> what is the sound of microacoustic music? >> let's find out >> each microsound member gets a chance to describe what microacoustic music >> sounds like to them >> >> >> GUIDELINES: >> >> - length: all works must be 2 minutes maximum >> >> - deadline: February 1 2010 >> >> - mp3 files: filenames use only ALPHANUMERICS; i.e. NO spaces >> (underbars_and-hyphens-are-OK), stereo, encoded at 192 - 320kbps and have >> ID3 tags!! please make sure they have ID3 tags! >> content: all sound sources are acoustic musical instruments >> with NO processing other than the following: >> - mixing/layering >> - editing (cut 'n paste) >> - slowing down or speeding up >> - filtering/EQ >> >> instruments can be detuned, woodwinds played as percussion, stick a sax >> mouthpiece on a bassoon, contact mic'd, deconstructed, use extended >> techniques, destroyed or played 'properly' then (de)composed in editing >> >> files should be placed here: >> >> http://www.microsound.org/repository/ >> >> there is also a link on the microsound.org front page >> >> ***you MUST be sub'd to the list before you are allowed to upload files >> >> the server checks for you against the list of sub'ers >> >> if you are having trouble write to Paulo or John and ask them to update the >> list >> (has to be done by hand IIRC) >> >> ___remember to name and tag your files properly or they will be taken >> down___ >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > html> > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > End of microsound Digest, Vol 12, Issue 10 > ****************************************** From sensorium.ccu at googlemail.com Thu Dec 17 05:46:24 2009 From: sensorium.ccu at googlemail.com (Senorium.ccu) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 10:46:24 +0000 Subject: [microsound] a periodic reminder In-Reply-To: <4B294547.8050201@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B294547.8050201@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: <64BAAF71-5FAA-4C94-AAF9-646B170798F7@googlemail.com> In that case, I would like to invite you to listen to http://soundcloud.com/ccu/a-le-1 Feedback is welcome if you think it suitable. Cannot guarantee it is suitable as microsound/post laptop/pre laptop/genre 1,2,3 or noise. Sent from my iPhone On 16 Dec 2009, at 20:38, Kim Cascone wrote: > please people > this list is not meant for announcing anything > except new works you want to share with the community and/or get > feedback on > > please please please read the frickin' statement in BIG RED LETTERS on > the same page you happened to sub from? > > it is all right there is painfully unsubtle text > screaming at you in bold red: > DO NOT POST ANNOUNCEMENTS TO THE MAIN MICROSOUND LIST!!! > there is another list for this > which you can sub to and announce and cross-post to > > > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From offsetneedlesound at yahoo.com Thu Dec 17 09:45:52 2009 From: offsetneedlesound at yahoo.com (JoshB/Offset Needle Radius) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 06:45:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [microsound] Unsubscribe Message-ID: <735648.8816.qm@web46407.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Please unsubscribe me from Microsound mailing list. I don't know what happened, but suddenly I'm getting a dozen emails a day. I would like it to end. THanks, JoshB JoshB Offset Needle Radius www.offsetneedlesound.blogspot.com www.myspace.com/offsetneedleradius -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 3106 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 3365 bytes Desc: not available URL: From noisesmith at gmail.com Thu Dec 17 12:46:24 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 09:46:24 -0800 Subject: [microsound] hyperlinks for the "related links" page on microsound.org Message-ID: <4B2A6E70.4040505@gmail.com> Hi, attached is an incomplete set of links for the names on the "related links" page on microsound.org, which, despite the pages title, does not actually have any hyperlinks. I applied my own knowledge of the artists in my search where applicable, and just relied on google and best guesses otherwise. Please do double check my work! Where possible I have included both the native spelling and the romanization of names where both might be applicable (Japanese and Greek names). I am not literate in Japanese or Greek, so hopefully people who are fluent can double check what I have copied and pasted. Some of the links I found are not the best quality. Wherever possible I linked to both the artists home page (or posthumous official site) and some external reference (wikipedia wherever possible). I plan on going through the links again now that I have compiled them and finding a whole bunch of new ideas and sounds. I hope these links are similarly useful to the rest of you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal at zapala.com.pl Fri Dec 18 09:35:22 2009 From: rafal at zapala.com.pl (=?iso-8859-2?Q?rafa=B3_zapa=B3a?=) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:35:22 +0100 Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens Message-ID: <001a01ca7fef$56a81dd0$0b01a8c0@komputerdom> Hi (question about Microsound by Roads) - do you understend the difference between Gabor's Mattrix and Xanakis' conception of screens - it's completly unclear for me, i can't see any progress there? Both represent 3dimentional structure of grain: frequency, time and amplitude. According to the figure 2.2 p60 - i don't understand the sonogram too. +48 506050417 www.myspace.com/zapalarafal www.myspace.com/anarchenewmusicensemble :. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From robin at robinparmar.com Sat Dec 19 13:33:02 2009 From: robin at robinparmar.com (Robin Parmar) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 10:33:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [microsound] post-laptop era? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <340150.43789.qm@web51007.mail.re2.yahoo.com> David Powers wrote: > The lifespan of technologies is too short If the lifespan of any technology is long enough to produce a piece of music then it is long enough. > for any new instrument, there are no teachers and no tradition. All new instruments must perforce fall into one of the existing classes based on sound production. It will either have a vibrating membrane, string or column of air or produce sound electronically. In each case one can base one's tutelage on similar instruments, with generations of prior knowledge at one's disposal. > Thus, it is difficult if not impossible to achieve > the kind of virtuosity that is possible on more > traditional instruments. This in turn means the range > of performance possibilities tends to be rather limited, > or if I might say so, even rather "amateurish". I am almost never interested in virtuosity and am likewise uninterested in naive amateurism. You are dismissing a world of music that lies in between. > I believe that much important musical knowledge is being lost I have no idea how you come to that conclusion. Or why you wish to attribute the cause of such a fate to electronic musicians. Surely someone can make music with, say, pure sine tones, without being blamed for the loss of indigenous music in the Amazon basin? Should students of additive synthesis be considered deficient if they do not have deep knowledge of, say, a Javanese Gamelon? One might just as well chastise Hindustani practitioners for a deep ignorance of death metal. > The problem with this is that sampling (like > the application of novel dsp effects here and > there) normally exists entirely at the surface; > it is in most cases merely a "sound effect". I can think of no viable definition of "sampling" that would lead to that conclusion, but I would prefer to know your working definition in any case. If sampling is taken to mean the appropriation of segments of a previous work, then it has been alive and well through the traditions of electronica, hip-hop, jazz, most folk musics, etc., all the way back to the beginnings of music itself. If it is taken to mean the digital renderings of analogue audio then it has many decades of rigorous study and application by researchers, academic composers, drum'n'bass artists, purveyors of noise and drone, and so on... all of whom would find it rather insulting to be compared to a "special effect" (which is what you appear to mean, rather than "sound effect".) > It has no impact on the inner structure of a musical composition. We are on the microsound list. Please read Curtis Roads' book of the same name to understand the deep impact on musical structure at various time scales that digital sampling has in fact engendered. > Technological progress is not bringing more freedom, it > is not opening up new possibilities, precisely because > progress remains entirely within the coordinates of the > market place and the society of controlled consumption. Explain again how "My Favorite Things" was free of the market? Or free of technology? Or perhaps admit to a less negative and more nuanced view of life under capital. -- Robin Parmar From robin at robinparmar.com Sat Dec 19 20:26:49 2009 From: robin at robinparmar.com (Robin Parmar) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 17:26:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <409681.37321.qm@web51004.mail.re2.yahoo.com> David Powers wrote: > That's interesting thanks for that info -- I'm no > recording engineer, and was not aware that modern > equipment would actually create a harsher sound. > Maybe that's something in favor of lo-fi then... > > But, this may be a naive question, why would a > flat response microphone recording a saxophone > sound harsher than the same sound if I'm listening > to it standing next to the saxophone? Or is it just > because the mic is normally much closer than the ear? You are right to question this statement. Current equipment, even at the semi-pro level, is well able to capture the frequencies and dynamics of input sounds very accurately. This does not result in a "harsh" sound; it results in a realistic sound. That is: the output corresponds with the input to a high degree of fidelity. However, some prefer the "warmth" of older recordings due to the distortion added by tube gear and tape saturation. These mechanical devices tend to add second-order harmonics. If you are indoctrinated into that mode of listening then something "better" might sound harsher, but only because you are used to listening to a distorted signal. There are other factors. Early digital encoding was inaccurate and "harsh" in a different sense: square wave type distortions were added to the signal chain, clock timings were inaccurate, etc. But this is hardly a problem now unless the gear is really rubbish. If some wish to go "lo-fi" for aesthetic reasons then so be it. I have been known to employ low-pass filters myself to "warm up" a sound. But claiming digital is harsher is either an anachronism or a tell-tale sign of the analogue fetishist. --- Robin Parmar From mnelson2 at wisc.edu Mon Dec 21 13:45:48 2009 From: mnelson2 at wisc.edu (MSC Nelson) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:45:48 -0600 Subject: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 (Blue Note) In-Reply-To: <98b2fdd50912161431n6244a9fpbbd7af6df5f8b41b@mail.gmail.com> References: <4B290F85.8040806@anechoicmedia.com> <5badef3b0912161057n7c102f1crb207c4aa60c75537@mail.gmail.com> <5badef3b0912161239n2b210852nfe1916ff76d8a512@mail.gmail.com> <4B295967.2050203@gmail.com> <686ba4e40912161418q376c7200sd993c5ae96a2266c@mail.gmail.com> <4B295F57.4050905@gmail.com> <98b2fdd50912161431n6244a9fpbbd7af6df5f8b41b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <9689203FC41C4EDEA32EF63B7030EFA1@sohe.ad.wisc.edu> There are also some interviews with Rudy Van Gelder, the engineer for a huge chunk of those recordings. Shows a bit about his thinking. http://www.jazz.com/features-and-interviews/2009/4/11/in-conversation-with-r udy-van-gelder http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/weed/19990130.weed.05.ram Seems like he was pretty cautious about letting others see how he got the sound he did at Blue Note. Mark M.S.C. Nelson Associate Professor Design Studies Department University of Wisconsin-Madison Room 235 1300 Linden Drive Madison, WI 53706 608-261-1003 mnelson2 at wisc.edu -----Original Message----- From: microsound-bounces at or8.net [mailto:microsound-bounces at or8.net] On Behalf Of Milan Davidovic Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 4:32 PM To: microsound at microsound.org Subject: Re: [microsound] project: microacoustic pt2 On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Justin Glenn Smith wrote: > The Blue Note recordings were done on outdated equipment with far from a flat frequency response. To get that sound today you would use some kind of preamp or processor, modern equipment is too accurate in general and would sound overly harsh without some processing. Aside from liner notes, is there anything online where we can go and read more on this? Thanks. -- Milan Davidovic http://altmilan.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound From randal_davis at operamail.com Tue Dec 22 14:53:29 2009 From: randal_davis at operamail.com (Randal Davis) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 20:53:29 +0100 Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens Message-ID: <20091222195329.4E104448C8@ws5-1.us4.outblaze.com> An excellent question, and I'll have a go at its answer[s], in plural. There are, I think, several different ways of approaching it, all, in their own ways, reasonable. Page references are to both Microsound and Formalized Music. >From what perspectives do differences between Gabor and Xenakis appear? As Rafal correctly points out, they are both mathematical formalisms representing a "3-dimensional structure of grain: frequency, time and amplitude." One could, therefore, reasonably conclude that the differences between them are not significant, if the vehicle of comparison is, say, a Fourier model. That is the most general, and simplest, answer to the question; not very illuminating, either. Evenso, to understand Xenakis' contention that "a book of screens equals the life of a complex sound" (Xenakis, 1971, 51) as opposed to the Fourier model is to understand a very profound distinction in how sound may be conceptualized. It's also useful to consider questions of intent. As Roads points out, "it is important to emphasize the analytical orientation of Gabor's theory" (57). Gabor was interested in a theory of hearing, arguing that an approach premised on sound quanta was superior to the "Fourier analysis of infinite signals" (58), and hence the Gabor matrix. While a simplified graphic representation of such a matrix and one of Xenakis' screens might appear visually similar, Xenakis, Roads notes, had interests less purely theoretical, instead aiming toward the "explication of a compositional theory for sound grains" (65). Let's not, though, do too much too quickly with this distinction of what looks like "theory" (Gabor) and "practice" (Xenakis). Look more closely at Xenakis'lemma for Markovian stochastic music: "All sound, even continuous musical variation, is conceived as an assemblage of a large number of elementary sounds adequately disposed in time. In the attack, body and decline of a complex sound, thousands of pure sounds appear in a more or less short interval of time delta-t" (Xenakis, 1971 & 1992, 43, and Roads, 65). Does Xenakis differ from Gabor here? If so, how? We could return to our earlier, very general, statement of their congruence, or try and phrase the matter of their difference differently, one might say. That is, accepting certain similarities in their formalisms, which is the most complete? Does Gabor "explain" Xenakis better, i.e., more completely, than Xenakis "explains" Gabor? Look back at Roads' explication of Gabor's sound quanta, specifically the necessity of an "uncertainty relation between time and frequency resolution" (58). Now reread the lemma, and note the revealing phrase, that the sound grains appear "in a more or less short interval of time." That phrase, in my interpretation, is a specific reference to Gabor's uncertainty relation - as the interval of time grows "more or less" longer, the sound may indeed become more "pure" (e.g. pitch-determinant). However, as the time interval grows shorter, resolution in the pitch domain lessens, and the "pure" sound becomes "fuzzier" or, more precisely, subject only to a more probabilistic representation. Thus does Roads refer to the "problems with a constant microtime grid" (67-8). Xenakis was surely not unaware of this, and it is therefore significant to observe that in his graphic representation of a "book of screens" (Xenakis, 1971, 51 & 53) each cell of the screen is itself something very much like the graphic representation of a Gabor matrix; he also allows that grains may "fluctuate around a mean frequency and intensity" (52). It therefore seems to me that Gabor's is the more complete, which is to say the more fundamental, account of the sonic quanta for its premising of an irreducible uncertainty. At the same time, as noted, one might imagine that most musicians and composers preferring the Xenakis formalism (at least speaking for myself, here) for its more ready conceptualization of the behavior and manipulation of complex sounds. The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' figure 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic representation do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer there except this may be an editorial error. Best wishes to all for 2010. RD > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "rafa? zapa?a" > To: microsound at or8.net > Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:35:22 +0100 > > > Hi > (question about Microsound by Roads) - do you > understend the difference between Gabor's Mattrix and Xanakis' > conception of screens - it's completly unclear for me, i can't see any > progress there? Both represent 3dimentional structure of grain: > frequency, time and amplitude. According to the figure 2.2 p60 - i don't > understand the sonogram too. > > > +48 506050417 > www.myspace.com/zapalarafal > www.myspace.com/anarchenewmusicensemble :. > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- _______________________________________________ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze From christopherjette at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:31:17 2009 From: christopherjette at gmail.com (christopher jette) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:31:17 -0800 Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens In-Reply-To: <20091222195329.4E104448C8@ws5-1.us4.outblaze.com> References: <20091222195329.4E104448C8@ws5-1.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <18b394640912221331j1051140cobd4fb4c3087bece2@mail.gmail.com> Greetings, I am not sure that I understand the confusion with the sonographic image, Roads 2.2 page 60 > The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' figure > 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic representation > do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer there except > this may be an editorial error. > If one looks first @ the sonogram and the lowest left hand corner, noting where the lines indicating the binding constraints are, there is a portion of the FFT that is within these confines. From here one can compare this with the numerical and graphical representations in the top 2 graphs. It is the same data represented in different fashions. While the description describes this in the reverse order, it says virtually the same. I fail to see the error. Cheers~ Christohpher 2009/12/22 Randal Davis > An excellent question, and I'll have a go at its answer[s], in plural. > There are, I think, several different ways of approaching it, all, in their > own ways, reasonable. Page references are to both Microsound and Formalized > Music. > > >From what perspectives do differences between Gabor and Xenakis appear? > As Rafal correctly points out, they are both mathematical formalisms > representing a "3-dimensional structure of grain: frequency, time and > amplitude." One could, therefore, reasonably conclude that the differences > between them are not significant, if the vehicle of comparison is, say, a > Fourier model. > > That is the most general, and simplest, answer to the question; not very > illuminating, either. Evenso, to understand Xenakis' contention that "a > book of screens equals the life of a complex sound" (Xenakis, 1971, 51) as > opposed to the Fourier model is to understand a very profound distinction in > how sound may be conceptualized. > > It's also useful to consider questions of intent. As Roads points out, "it > is important to emphasize the analytical orientation of Gabor's theory" > (57). Gabor was interested in a theory of hearing, arguing that an approach > premised on sound quanta was superior to the "Fourier analysis of infinite > signals" (58), and hence the Gabor matrix. While a simplified graphic > representation of such a matrix and one of Xenakis' screens might appear > visually similar, Xenakis, Roads notes, had interests less purely > theoretical, instead aiming toward the "explication of a compositional > theory for sound grains" (65). > > Let's not, though, do too much too quickly with this distinction of what > looks like "theory" (Gabor) and "practice" (Xenakis). Look more closely at > Xenakis'lemma for Markovian stochastic music: "All sound, even continuous > musical variation, is conceived as an assemblage of a large number of > elementary sounds adequately disposed in time. In the attack, body and > decline of a complex sound, thousands of pure sounds appear in a more or > less short interval of time delta-t" (Xenakis, 1971 & 1992, 43, and Roads, > 65). > > Does Xenakis differ from Gabor here? If so, how? We could return to our > earlier, very general, statement of their congruence, or try and phrase the > matter of their difference differently, one might say. That is, accepting > certain similarities in their formalisms, which is the most complete? Does > Gabor "explain" Xenakis better, i.e., more completely, than Xenakis > "explains" Gabor? Look back at Roads' explication of Gabor's sound quanta, > specifically the necessity of an "uncertainty relation between time and > frequency resolution" (58). Now reread the lemma, and note the revealing > phrase, that the sound grains appear "in a more or less short interval of > time." > > That phrase, in my interpretation, is a specific reference to Gabor's > uncertainty relation - as the interval of time grows "more or less" longer, > the sound may indeed become more "pure" (e.g. pitch-determinant). However, > as the time interval grows shorter, resolution in the pitch domain lessens, > and the "pure" sound becomes "fuzzier" or, more precisely, subject only to a > more probabilistic representation. Thus does Roads refer to the "problems > with a constant microtime grid" (67-8). > > Xenakis was surely not unaware of this, and it is therefore significant to > observe that in his graphic representation of a "book of screens" (Xenakis, > 1971, 51 & 53) each cell of the screen is itself something very much like > the graphic representation of a Gabor matrix; he also allows that grains may > "fluctuate around a mean frequency and intensity" (52). > > It therefore seems to me that Gabor's is the more complete, which is to say > the more fundamental, account of the sonic quanta for its premising of an > irreducible uncertainty. At the same time, as noted, one might imagine that > most musicians and composers preferring the Xenakis formalism (at least > speaking for myself, here) for its more ready conceptualization of the > behavior and manipulation of complex sounds. > > The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' figure > 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic representation > do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer there except > this may be an editorial error. > > Best wishes to all for 2010. > > RD > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "rafa? zapa?a" > > To: microsound at or8.net > > Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens > > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:35:22 +0100 > > > > > > Hi > > (question about Microsound by Roads) - do you > > understend the difference between Gabor's Mattrix and Xanakis' > > conception of screens - it's completly unclear for me, i can't see any > > progress there? Both represent 3dimentional structure of grain: > > frequency, time and amplitude. According to the figure 2.2 p60 - i don't > > understand the sonogram too. > > > > > > +48 506050417 > > www.myspace.com/zapalarafal > > www.myspace.com/anarchenewmusicensemble :. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > microsound mailing list > > microsound at microsound.org > > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > > > -- > _______________________________________________ > Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: > Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com > > Powered by Outblaze > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- www.cj.lovelyweather.com christopherjette at gmail.com 617.869.3968 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From timothy.leonido at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 16:49:36 2009 From: timothy.leonido at gmail.com (Timothy Leonido) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:49:36 -0500 Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens In-Reply-To: <18b394640912221331j1051140cobd4fb4c3087bece2@mail.gmail.com> References: <20091222195329.4E104448C8@ws5-1.us4.outblaze.com> <18b394640912221331j1051140cobd4fb4c3087bece2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: http://teneolupum.blogspot.com/ 2009/12/22 christopher jette > Greetings, > I am not sure that I understand the confusion with the sonographic image, > Roads 2.2 page 60 > > The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' figure >> 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic representation >> do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer there except >> this may be an editorial error. >> > > If one looks first @ the sonogram and the lowest left hand corner, noting > where the lines indicating the binding constraints are, there is a portion > of the FFT that is within these confines. From here one can compare this > with the numerical and graphical representations in the top 2 graphs. It is > the same data represented in different fashions. While the description > describes this in the reverse order, it says virtually the same. I fail to > see the error. > > Cheers~ > Christohpher > > 2009/12/22 Randal Davis > > An excellent question, and I'll have a go at its answer[s], in plural. >> There are, I think, several different ways of approaching it, all, in their >> own ways, reasonable. Page references are to both Microsound and Formalized >> Music. >> >> >From what perspectives do differences between Gabor and Xenakis appear? >> As Rafal correctly points out, they are both mathematical formalisms >> representing a "3-dimensional structure of grain: frequency, time and >> amplitude." One could, therefore, reasonably conclude that the differences >> between them are not significant, if the vehicle of comparison is, say, a >> Fourier model. >> >> That is the most general, and simplest, answer to the question; not very >> illuminating, either. Evenso, to understand Xenakis' contention that "a >> book of screens equals the life of a complex sound" (Xenakis, 1971, 51) as >> opposed to the Fourier model is to understand a very profound distinction in >> how sound may be conceptualized. >> >> It's also useful to consider questions of intent. As Roads points out, >> "it is important to emphasize the analytical orientation of Gabor's theory" >> (57). Gabor was interested in a theory of hearing, arguing that an approach >> premised on sound quanta was superior to the "Fourier analysis of infinite >> signals" (58), and hence the Gabor matrix. While a simplified graphic >> representation of such a matrix and one of Xenakis' screens might appear >> visually similar, Xenakis, Roads notes, had interests less purely >> theoretical, instead aiming toward the "explication of a compositional >> theory for sound grains" (65). >> >> Let's not, though, do too much too quickly with this distinction of what >> looks like "theory" (Gabor) and "practice" (Xenakis). Look more closely at >> Xenakis'lemma for Markovian stochastic music: "All sound, even continuous >> musical variation, is conceived as an assemblage of a large number of >> elementary sounds adequately disposed in time. In the attack, body and >> decline of a complex sound, thousands of pure sounds appear in a more or >> less short interval of time delta-t" (Xenakis, 1971 & 1992, 43, and Roads, >> 65). >> >> Does Xenakis differ from Gabor here? If so, how? We could return to our >> earlier, very general, statement of their congruence, or try and phrase the >> matter of their difference differently, one might say. That is, accepting >> certain similarities in their formalisms, which is the most complete? Does >> Gabor "explain" Xenakis better, i.e., more completely, than Xenakis >> "explains" Gabor? Look back at Roads' explication of Gabor's sound quanta, >> specifically the necessity of an "uncertainty relation between time and >> frequency resolution" (58). Now reread the lemma, and note the revealing >> phrase, that the sound grains appear "in a more or less short interval of >> time." >> >> That phrase, in my interpretation, is a specific reference to Gabor's >> uncertainty relation - as the interval of time grows "more or less" longer, >> the sound may indeed become more "pure" (e.g. pitch-determinant). However, >> as the time interval grows shorter, resolution in the pitch domain lessens, >> and the "pure" sound becomes "fuzzier" or, more precisely, subject only to a >> more probabilistic representation. Thus does Roads refer to the "problems >> with a constant microtime grid" (67-8). >> >> Xenakis was surely not unaware of this, and it is therefore significant to >> observe that in his graphic representation of a "book of screens" (Xenakis, >> 1971, 51 & 53) each cell of the screen is itself something very much like >> the graphic representation of a Gabor matrix; he also allows that grains may >> "fluctuate around a mean frequency and intensity" (52). >> >> It therefore seems to me that Gabor's is the more complete, which is to >> say the more fundamental, account of the sonic quanta for its premising of >> an irreducible uncertainty. At the same time, as noted, one might imagine >> that most musicians and composers preferring the Xenakis formalism (at least >> speaking for myself, here) for its more ready conceptualization of the >> behavior and manipulation of complex sounds. >> >> The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' >> figure 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic >> representation do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer >> there except this may be an editorial error. >> >> Best wishes to all for 2010. >> >> RD >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "rafa? zapa?a" >> > To: microsound at or8.net >> > Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens >> > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:35:22 +0100 >> > >> > >> > Hi >> > (question about Microsound by Roads) - do you >> > understend the difference between Gabor's Mattrix and Xanakis' >> > conception of screens - it's completly unclear for me, i can't see any >> > progress there? Both represent 3dimentional structure of grain: >> > frequency, time and amplitude. According to the figure 2.2 p60 - i don't >> > understand the sonogram too. >> > >> > >> > +48 506050417 >> > www.myspace.com/zapalarafal >> > www.myspace.com/anarchenewmusicensemble :. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > microsound mailing list >> > microsound at microsound.org >> > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> >> > >> >> >> -- >> _______________________________________________ >> Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: >> Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com >> >> Powered by Outblaze >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound >> > > > > -- > www.cj.lovelyweather.com > christopherjette at gmail.com > 617.869.3968 > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal at zapala.com.pl Mon Dec 21 09:25:37 2009 From: rafal at zapala.com.pl (=?iso-8859-2?Q?rafa=B3_zapa=B3a?=) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:25:37 +0100 Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens References: <20091222195329.4E104448C8@ws5-1.us4.outblaze.com> <18b394640912221331j1051140cobd4fb4c3087bece2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <003701ca8249$78df8b20$0b01a8c0@komputerdom> hmm..., sure i've noticed the delta v and delta t constrains at both: sonogram and matrixes above, but it still look different to me. i'm musician, and at my first [and the second :)] glance i see on sonogram kind of rhythmical points with a different harmonics composition, and matrixes show to me something like fluent crescendo and then diminue,do process of one complex sound . Do delta v and delta t show the same periods both at matrixes and sono? No i still can't find and similarities. Maybe it's more clear for any phisician ? greetings - zapala ----- Original Message ----- From: christopher jette To: microsound at microsound.org Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 10:31 PM Subject: Re: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens Greetings, I am not sure that I understand the confusion with the sonographic image, Roads 2.2 page 60 The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' figure 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic representation do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer there except this may be an editorial error. If one looks first @ the sonogram and the lowest left hand corner, noting where the lines indicating the binding constraints are, there is a portion of the FFT that is within these confines. From here one can compare this with the numerical and graphical representations in the top 2 graphs. It is the same data represented in different fashions. While the description describes this in the reverse order, it says virtually the same. I fail to see the error. Cheers~ Christohpher 2009/12/22 Randal Davis An excellent question, and I'll have a go at its answer[s], in plural. There are, I think, several different ways of approaching it, all, in their own ways, reasonable. Page references are to both Microsound and Formalized Music. >From what perspectives do differences between Gabor and Xenakis appear? As Rafal correctly points out, they are both mathematical formalisms representing a "3-dimensional structure of grain: frequency, time and amplitude." One could, therefore, reasonably conclude that the differences between them are not significant, if the vehicle of comparison is, say, a Fourier model. That is the most general, and simplest, answer to the question; not very illuminating, either. Evenso, to understand Xenakis' contention that "a book of screens equals the life of a complex sound" (Xenakis, 1971, 51) as opposed to the Fourier model is to understand a very profound distinction in how sound may be conceptualized. It's also useful to consider questions of intent. As Roads points out, "it is important to emphasize the analytical orientation of Gabor's theory" (57). Gabor was interested in a theory of hearing, arguing that an approach premised on sound quanta was superior to the "Fourier analysis of infinite signals" (58), and hence the Gabor matrix. While a simplified graphic representation of such a matrix and one of Xenakis' screens might appear visually similar, Xenakis, Roads notes, had interests less purely theoretical, instead aiming toward the "explication of a compositional theory for sound grains" (65). Let's not, though, do too much too quickly with this distinction of what looks like "theory" (Gabor) and "practice" (Xenakis). Look more closely at Xenakis'lemma for Markovian stochastic music: "All sound, even continuous musical variation, is conceived as an assemblage of a large number of elementary sounds adequately disposed in time. In the attack, body and decline of a complex sound, thousands of pure sounds appear in a more or less short interval of time delta-t" (Xenakis, 1971 & 1992, 43, and Roads, 65). Does Xenakis differ from Gabor here? If so, how? We could return to our earlier, very general, statement of their congruence, or try and phrase the matter of their difference differently, one might say. That is, accepting certain similarities in their formalisms, which is the most complete? Does Gabor "explain" Xenakis better, i.e., more completely, than Xenakis "explains" Gabor? Look back at Roads' explication of Gabor's sound quanta, specifically the necessity of an "uncertainty relation between time and frequency resolution" (58). Now reread the lemma, and note the revealing phrase, that the sound grains appear "in a more or less short interval of time." That phrase, in my interpretation, is a specific reference to Gabor's uncertainty relation - as the interval of time grows "more or less" longer, the sound may indeed become more "pure" (e.g. pitch-determinant). However, as the time interval grows shorter, resolution in the pitch domain lessens, and the "pure" sound becomes "fuzzier" or, more precisely, subject only to a more probabilistic representation. Thus does Roads refer to the "problems with a constant microtime grid" (67-8). Xenakis was surely not unaware of this, and it is therefore significant to observe that in his graphic representation of a "book of screens" (Xenakis, 1971, 51 & 53) each cell of the screen is itself something very much like the graphic representation of a Gabor matrix; he also allows that grains may "fluctuate around a mean frequency and intensity" (52). It therefore seems to me that Gabor's is the more complete, which is to say the more fundamental, account of the sonic quanta for its premising of an irreducible uncertainty. At the same time, as noted, one might imagine that most musicians and composers preferring the Xenakis formalism (at least speaking for myself, here) for its more ready conceptualization of the behavior and manipulation of complex sounds. The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' figure 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic representation do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer there except this may be an editorial error. Best wishes to all for 2010. RD > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "rafa? zapa?a" > To: microsound at or8.net > Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:35:22 +0100 > > > Hi > (question about Microsound by Roads) - do you > understend the difference between Gabor's Mattrix and Xanakis' > conception of screens - it's completly unclear for me, i can't see any > progress there? Both represent 3dimentional structure of grain: > frequency, time and amplitude. According to the figure 2.2 p60 - i don't > understand the sonogram too. > > > +48 506050417 > www.myspace.com/zapalarafal > www.myspace.com/anarchenewmusicensemble :. > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- _______________________________________________ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound -- www.cj.lovelyweather.com christopherjette at gmail.com 617.869.3968 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ microsound mailing list microsound at microsound.org http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound __________ Informacja programu ESET Smart Security, wersja bazy sygnatur wirusow 4710 (20091222) __________ Wiadomosc zostala sprawdzona przez program ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.pl lub http://www.eset.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From randal_davis at operamail.com Tue Dec 22 17:17:37 2009 From: randal_davis at operamail.com (Randal Davis) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 23:17:37 +0100 Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens Message-ID: <20091222221737.AF6AA448C8@ws5-1.us4.outblaze.com> Let me try again, Christopher - my difficulty with this unfortunately remains. We agree that the numerics of 2.2a correspond to the graphic representations of 2.2b. The translation of 2.2a/b to the sonogram still seems opaque, perhaps not least for the difference is scaling. And reversing the order of explanation, as you suggest, doesn't do much for me. "The portion of the FFT that is within these confines," which is to say, the "binding constraints" of delta-v and delta-t, as you say, appears to me to be empty. The principles of the translation are clear enough, both in Roads and in your reversal, but, again, perhaps because of the scaling, I do not see the equivalence so readily as you. Nor, apparently, does Rafal. Readers without a copy of Roads' book to hand can check this illustration in the Google Books "limited preview." Thanks for trying to help me, Christopher - I should have confessed up front to having serious problems, though, with illustration-only instructions for assembly! RD > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "christopher jette" > To: microsound at microsound.org > Subject: Re: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:31:17 -0800 > > > Greetings, > I am not sure that I understand the confusion with the sonographic image, > Roads 2.2 page 60 > > > The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' figure > > 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic representation > > do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer there except > > this may be an editorial error. > > > > If one looks first @ the sonogram and the lowest left hand corner, noting > where the lines indicating the binding constraints are, there is a portion > of the FFT that is within these confines. From here one can compare this > with the numerical and graphical representations in the top 2 graphs. It is > the same data represented in different fashions. While the description > describes this in the reverse order, it says virtually the same. I fail to > see the error. > > Cheers~ > Christohpher > > 2009/12/22 Randal Davis > > > An excellent question, and I'll have a go at its answer[s], in plural. > > There are, I think, several different ways of approaching it, all, in their > > own ways, reasonable. Page references are to both Microsound and Formalized > > Music. > > > > >From what perspectives do differences between Gabor and Xenakis appear? > > As Rafal correctly points out, they are both mathematical formalisms > > representing a "3-dimensional structure of grain: frequency, time and > > amplitude." One could, therefore, reasonably conclude that the differences > > between them are not significant, if the vehicle of comparison is, say, a > > Fourier model. > > > > That is the most general, and simplest, answer to the question; not very > > illuminating, either. Evenso, to understand Xenakis' contention that "a > > book of screens equals the life of a complex sound" (Xenakis, 1971, 51) as > > opposed to the Fourier model is to understand a very profound distinction in > > how sound may be conceptualized. > > > > It's also useful to consider questions of intent. As Roads points out, "it > > is important to emphasize the analytical orientation of Gabor's theory" > > (57). Gabor was interested in a theory of hearing, arguing that an approach > > premised on sound quanta was superior to the "Fourier analysis of infinite > > signals" (58), and hence the Gabor matrix. While a simplified graphic > > representation of such a matrix and one of Xenakis' screens might appear > > visually similar, Xenakis, Roads notes, had interests less purely > > theoretical, instead aiming toward the "explication of a compositional > > theory for sound grains" (65). > > > > Let's not, though, do too much too quickly with this distinction of what > > looks like "theory" (Gabor) and "practice" (Xenakis). Look more closely at > > Xenakis'lemma for Markovian stochastic music: "All sound, even continuous > > musical variation, is conceived as an assemblage of a large number of > > elementary sounds adequately disposed in time. In the attack, body and > > decline of a complex sound, thousands of pure sounds appear in a more or > > less short interval of time delta-t" (Xenakis, 1971 & 1992, 43, and Roads, > > 65). > > > > Does Xenakis differ from Gabor here? If so, how? We could return to our > > earlier, very general, statement of their congruence, or try and phrase the > > matter of their difference differently, one might say. That is, accepting > > certain similarities in their formalisms, which is the most complete? Does > > Gabor "explain" Xenakis better, i.e., more completely, than Xenakis > > "explains" Gabor? Look back at Roads' explication of Gabor's sound quanta, > > specifically the necessity of an "uncertainty relation between time and > > frequency resolution" (58). Now reread the lemma, and note the revealing > > phrase, that the sound grains appear "in a more or less short interval of > > time." > > > > That phrase, in my interpretation, is a specific reference to Gabor's > > uncertainty relation - as the interval of time grows "more or less" longer, > > the sound may indeed become more "pure" (e.g. pitch-determinant). However, > > as the time interval grows shorter, resolution in the pitch domain lessens, > > and the "pure" sound becomes "fuzzier" or, more precisely, subject only to a > > more probabilistic representation. Thus does Roads refer to the "problems > > with a constant microtime grid" (67-8). > > > > Xenakis was surely not unaware of this, and it is therefore significant to > > observe that in his graphic representation of a "book of screens" (Xenakis, > > 1971, 51 & 53) each cell of the screen is itself something very much like > > the graphic representation of a Gabor matrix; he also allows that grains may > > "fluctuate around a mean frequency and intensity" (52). > > > > It therefore seems to me that Gabor's is the more complete, which is to say > > the more fundamental, account of the sonic quanta for its premising of an > > irreducible uncertainty. At the same time, as noted, one might imagine that > > most musicians and composers preferring the Xenakis formalism (at least > > speaking for myself, here) for its more ready conceptualization of the > > behavior and manipulation of complex sounds. > > > > The question, too, concerning the sonographic representation (Roads' figure > > 2.2) also is a good one, as the description and the graphic representation > > do not seem to me to coincide. I have nothing more to offer there except > > this may be an editorial error. > > > > Best wishes to all for 2010. > > > > RD > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "rafa? zapa?a" > > > To: microsound at or8.net > > > Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens > > > Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:35:22 +0100 > > > > > > > > > Hi > > > (question about Microsound by Roads) - do you > > > understend the difference between Gabor's Mattrix and Xanakis' > > > conception of screens - it's completly unclear for me, i can't see any > > > progress there? Both represent 3dimentional structure of grain: > > > frequency, time and amplitude. According to the figure 2.2 p60 - i don't > > > understand the sonogram too. > > > > > > > > > +48 506050417 > > > www.myspace.com/zapalarafal > > > www.myspace.com/anarchenewmusicensemble :. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > microsound mailing list > > > microsound at microsound.org > > > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > > Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: > > Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com > > > > Powered by Outblaze > > _______________________________________________ > > microsound mailing list > > microsound at microsound.org > > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > > > -- > www.cj.lovelyweather.com > christopherjette at gmail.com > 617.869.3968 > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- _______________________________________________ Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way: Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com Powered by Outblaze From paulo.mouat at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:56:27 2009 From: paulo.mouat at gmail.com (Paulo Mouat) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:56:27 -0500 Subject: [microsound] Gabor's matrix vs. Xenakis' screens In-Reply-To: <003701ca8249$78df8b20$0b01a8c0@komputerdom> References: <20091222195329.4E104448C8@ws5-1.us4.outblaze.com> <18b394640912221331j1051140cobd4fb4c3087bece2@mail.gmail.com> <003701ca8249$78df8b20$0b01a8c0@komputerdom> Message-ID: <424ce300912221556g7521a2f0ia2008bb7077ce41@mail.gmail.com> I don't read it as displaying the same info. The two grids at the top display the same information, the crescendo-diminuendo you talk about; the sonogram at the bottom has a lot more going on. It looks like the grids are displaying a single strand of one of the events in the sonogram. I don't think they were meant to match. Essentially, the information contained in the Gabor matrices is time along the horizontal axis, frequency along the vertical and intensity represented numerically or as the size of the circles. The evolution of the sound is read from left to right. Xenakis' screens represent frequency and intensity along the axes, with a single screen representing a single moment in time; a sequence of screens (or a "book") will represent the evolution of the sound over time, just like frames in a movie. //p http://www.interdisciplina.org/00.0 2009/12/21 rafa? zapa?a > hmm..., sure i've noticed the *delta v *and *delta t* constrains at both: > sonogram and matrixes above, but it still look different to me. i'm > musician, and at my first [and the second :)] glance i see on sonogram kind > of rhythmical points with a different harmonics composition, and matrixes > show to me something like fluent crescendo and then diminue,do process of > one complex sound . Do *delta v* and *delta t* show the same periods both > at matrixes and sono? No i still can't find and similarities. Maybe it's > more clear for any phisician ? > > greetings - zapala > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paulorcbarros at uol.com.br Tue Dec 22 19:04:34 2009 From: paulorcbarros at uol.com.br (PAULO R. C. BARROS) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:04:34 -0200 Subject: [microsound] "Boombox" Message-ID: <8A71EA9F1C9149E09EF2CB0FB555517E@PAULORCBARROS> http://www.vimeo.com/8310431 All the best, Paulo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noisesmith at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 23:43:59 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2009 20:43:59 -0800 Subject: [microsound] category theory and composition Message-ID: <4B31A00F.1040600@gmail.com> I have heard the claim that Bach wrote out the entirety of possible music composition - that every possible variation was present in his music, and nothing could be new after him. This, of course, is laughably false. But I was thinking about a context in which this could be made a true statement. In category theory there is the concept of a functor, which is a structure-preserving mapping from one category to another. If we treated two genres of composition as categories, we could define a functor to take a composition in one of these genres and get a composition in the other, without losing structural information (ie. analogous patterns would exist). Did I make this up? Am I remembering it from somewhere? Has someone tried it already? I am imagining mapping the sequence of pitches in a bach piece to spectral densities, and the durations to amplitude, and amplitude to pitch center, and timbre to duration. For example. With enough of a clinamen, of course, to keep things interesting (or maybe just keeping the clinamen of the original figured bass for example, but mapping it to a different part of the composition?). From asalch at math.jhu.edu Wed Dec 23 18:23:45 2009 From: asalch at math.jhu.edu (Andrew Salch) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 18:23:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: [microsound] category theory and composition In-Reply-To: <4B31A00F.1040600@gmail.com> References: <4B31A00F.1040600@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 22 Dec 2009, Justin Glenn Smith wrote: > But I was thinking about a context in which this could be made a true > statement. In category theory there is the concept of a functor, which > is a structure-preserving mapping from one category to another. If we > treated two genres of composition as categories, we could define a > functor to take a composition in one of these genres and get a > composition in the other, without losing structural information (ie. > analogous patterns would exist). How do we regard a genre of composition as a category? What are the objects and the morphisms of a genre of composition? From noisesmith at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 20:12:29 2009 From: noisesmith at gmail.com (Justin Glenn Smith) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 17:12:29 -0800 Subject: [microsound] category theory and composition In-Reply-To: References: <4B31A00F.1040600@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4B32BFFD.3090806@gmail.com> Andrew Salch wrote: > On Tue, 22 Dec 2009, Justin Glenn Smith wrote: >> But I was thinking about a context in which this could be made a true >> statement. In category theory there is the concept of a functor, which >> is a structure-preserving mapping from one category to another. If we >> treated two genres of composition as categories, we could define a >> functor to take a composition in one of these genres and get a >> composition in the other, without losing structural information (ie. >> analogous patterns would exist). > > > How do we regard a genre of composition as a category? What are the > objects and the morphisms of a genre of composition? > I was imagining that the objects of a genre of composition would be the individual compositions. And the morphisms would be whatever transformations are appropriate to that genre (arrangements, orchestrations, samplings, remixs, covers, each of these having sub variations remix->chop and screw, etc.). Each of these objects would be its own category, with key signatures, samples, instrumentation etc. etc. as its objects. Thus what I was imagining was a Functor allowing the usage of the material in another genre without losing structure, by remapping to a new category (thus in one mapping of categories for example the point in time in which a sound occurs may be mapped to the timbre in another domain). I was imagining I would allow myself the freedom to potentially invent a new genre (or if I was lucky, happen upon an existing one), by just letting the new genre be whichever one my deterministic mappings created. And reinventing those mappings until I get a result that somehow pleases me. It could be that my reasoning is sloppy about some of this, or that I am misusing some of these concepts. If so I do welcome correction. In the worst case I guess one could say that some guy probably wrote a song while looking at a sunset and on the other hand I wrote a song while thinking about math. From asalch at math.jhu.edu Wed Dec 23 22:13:15 2009 From: asalch at math.jhu.edu (Andrew Salch) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:13:15 -0500 (EST) Subject: [microsound] category theory and composition In-Reply-To: <4B32BFFD.3090806@gmail.com> References: <4B31A00F.1040600@gmail.com> <4B32BFFD.3090806@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, Justin Glenn Smith wrote: >> How do we regard a genre of composition as a category? What are the >> objects and the morphisms of a genre of composition? >> > > I was imagining that the objects of a genre of composition would be the > individual compositions. And the morphisms would be whatever > transformations are appropriate to that genre (arrangements, > orchestrations, samplings, remixs, covers, each of these having sub > variations remix->chop and screw, etc.). Each of these objects would be > its own category, with key signatures, samples, instrumentation etc. > etc. as its objects. > > Thus what I was imagining was a Functor allowing the usage of the > material in another genre without losing structure, by remapping to a > new category (thus in one mapping of categories for example the point in > time in which a sound occurs may be mapped to the timbre in another > domain). I was imagining I would allow myself the freedom to potentially > invent a new genre (or if I was lucky, happen upon an existing one), by > just letting the new genre be whichever one my deterministic mappings > created. And reinventing those mappings until I get a result that > somehow pleases me. Let's suppose what you describe is possible, that to every genre G we can associate a category C(G) with the following properties: -the objects of C(G) are the compositions possible within the genre G. -the morphisms from an object X of C(G) to an object Y of C(G) are the possible ways of transforming the composition X into the composition Y by a (finite?) sequence of rearrangements which are permitted within that genre. -composition of morphisms is given by composing the rearrangements. None of this is very precise and it would need to be spelled out in more detail. In any case, given genres G and H you could probably work out a way of associating a rearrangement in H to every rearrangement in G, and get a functor from C(G) to C(H) in this way. A simple example might be to let G be the "genre" (speaking loosely) of compositions consisting entirely of a single manipulated sine wave, while H could be the "genre" of compositions consisting of manipulations of at most two sine waves; clearly all compositions and rearrangements possibly in the genre G are also possibly in the genre H, so one has a full and faithful functor from C(G) to C(H). Here is another example: let G be the "genre" consisting of all pieces of music which can be described in some standard format, say, as a .MID file, which the morphisms are given by transposing any number of notes in a .MID file; and let H be the "genre" consisting of all 8-bit mono .WAV files, with morphisms given by changing the values of any number of bits in the .WAV files. Rendering the .MID file as a .WAV file using MIDI player software is one functor from C(G) to C(H), but simply appending a .WAV header to the .MID file (getting something which, when played, sounds like digital noise) is another, very different, functor from C(G) to C(H). The idea of beginning with established genres G and H, constructing some functor from C(G) to C(H), and considering the image of that functor in C(H) as a new genre, this might be interesting but only if you can cook up some interesting functors, i.e., some interesting ways of transforming acceptable rearrangements in one musical genre into acceptable rearrangements in another genre. From mail at maxviel.it Thu Dec 24 04:37:46 2009 From: mail at maxviel.it (Massimiliano Viel) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 10:37:46 +0100 Subject: [microsound] category theory and composition In-Reply-To: <4B31A00F.1040600@gmail.com> References: <4B31A00F.1040600@gmail.com> Message-ID: <26187EFD-8812-47C4-AA11-B41D37D9FE26@maxviel.it> By the way there is a book devoted to the application of category theory to music. I didn't read it so I can't go deeper about it, but maybe somebody out there might be interested in it. It is "The topos of music" written by Guerino Mazzola. http://www.amazon.com/Topos-Music-Geometric-Concepts-Performance/dp/3764357312 Il giorno 23/dic/2009, alle ore 05.43, Justin Glenn Smith ha scritto: > I have heard the claim that Bach wrote out the entirety of possible music composition - that every possible variation was present in his music, and nothing could be new after him. > > This, of course, is laughably false. > > But I was thinking about a context in which this could be made a true statement. In category theory there is the concept of a functor, which is a structure-preserving mapping from one category to another. If we treated two genres of composition as categories, we could define a functor to take a composition in one of these genres and get a composition in the other, without losing structural information (ie. analogous patterns would exist). > > Did I make this up? Am I remembering it from somewhere? Has someone tried it already? I am imagining mapping the sequence of pitches in a bach piece to spectral densities, and the durations to amplitude, and amplitude to pitch center, and timbre to duration. For example. With enough of a clinamen, of course, to keep things interesting (or maybe just keeping the clinamen of the original figured bass for example, but mapping it to a different part of the composition?). > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > __________________________________ M a s s i m i l i a n o V i e l MAIN SITE! -------------> http://www.maxviel.it BLOG! -------> http://maxviel.wordpress.com/ http://www.myspace.com/massimilianoviel http://www.ssim-el.net http://www.otolab.net http://www.sincronie.org __________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vze26m98 at optonline.net Fri Dec 25 18:22:23 2009 From: vze26m98 at optonline.net (Charles Turner) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2009 18:22:23 -0500 Subject: [microsound] British Council's 2006 "Sound and the City" CDs? Message-ID: <5F2B4EAB-43E3-409B-ABB2-C615219E62AC@optonline.net> Hey- A friend brought me a copy of the book from China, but sadly it's missing the two CDs. Would someone be willing to make OGG/MP3s for me? Please contact me offline... Thanks! Charles From kim at anechoicmedia.com Sat Dec 26 13:56:09 2009 From: kim at anechoicmedia.com (Kim Cascone) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:56:09 -0800 Subject: [microsound] a belated Happy Holidays Message-ID: <4B365C49.3060505@anechoicmedia.com> hope all .microsounders are having a peaceful and relaxing holiday and here's to another year of reading, thinking, composing and experimenting with sound peace to all in the new year KIM From dulcettrecords at hotmail.com Sat Dec 26 14:34:25 2009 From: dulcettrecords at hotmail.com (Robert Rudas) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 11:34:25 -0800 Subject: [microsound] a belated Happy Holidays In-Reply-To: <4B365C49.3060505@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B365C49.3060505@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: Happy Holidays to you too Kim. Best wishes, Robert R. > Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 10:56:09 -0800 > From: kim at anechoicmedia.com > To: microsound at or8.net; microsound-announce at or8.net > Subject: [microsound] a belated Happy Holidays > > hope all .microsounders are having a peaceful and relaxing holiday > and here's to another year of reading, thinking, composing and > experimenting with sound > peace to all in the new year > KIM > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/177141665/direct/01/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danko.djuric at gmail.com Sat Dec 26 15:18:46 2009 From: danko.djuric at gmail.com (Kodan) Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 21:18:46 +0100 Subject: [microsound] a belated Happy Holidays In-Reply-To: <4B365C49.3060505@anechoicmedia.com> References: <4B365C49.3060505@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: [?][?][?][?] to you too Kim, and for all microsunders in the new year, Danko Djuric 2009/12/26 Kim Cascone > hope all .microsounders are having a peaceful and relaxing holiday > and here's to another year of reading, thinking, composing and > experimenting with sound > peace to all in the new year > KIM > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- ----- Fight back spam! Download the Blue Frog. http://www.bluesecurity.com/register/s?user=a29kYW44MTM1 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 68 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 64 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 64 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 66 bytes Desc: not available URL: From diosdispone at gmail.com Mon Dec 28 11:21:18 2009 From: diosdispone at gmail.com (gerardo figueroa) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:21:18 -0300 Subject: [microsound] a belated Happy Holidays In-Reply-To: References: <4B365C49.3060505@anechoicmedia.com> Message-ID: ?gracias! - igual a todos por all? ;) desde chile On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Kodan wrote: > > > to you too Kim, > > and for all microsunders in the new year, > > Danko Djuric > > 2009/12/26 Kim Cascone >> >> hope all .microsounders are having a peaceful and relaxing holiday >> and here's to another year of reading, thinking, composing and experimenting with sound >> peace to all in the new year >> KIM >> _______________________________________________ >> microsound mailing list >> microsound at microsound.org >> http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > > > > -- > ----- > Fight back spam! Download the Blue Frog. > http://www.bluesecurity.com/register/s?user=a29kYW44MTM1 > > > _______________________________________________ > microsound mailing list > microsound at microsound.org > http://or8.net/mailman/listinfo/microsound > -- gerardo figueroa rodr?guez gfr broadcasting system works in [constant} progress since 1988 http://gfr.tumblr.com/ http://gfrwurlitzer.tumblr.com/ dios dispone