179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← archive index

Re: (idm) knob-twisting monkey music

6 messages · 5 participants · spans 5 days · search this subject
◇ merged from 2 subjects: (idm) knob-twisting monkey music · (idm) propellerhead...or the cool-io synth
1997-08-20 23:57Tim Gill Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
├─ 1997-08-20 21:27Nate Harrison [Digital Magician Inc] Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
└─ 1997-08-23 20:39wesley@interaccess.com Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
├─ 1997-08-25 22:42Mark Kolmar Re: (idm) knob-twisting monkey music
└─ 1997-08-26 00:28Tim Fothergill F. Ciencias Dpto. Biologia Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
└─ 1997-08-26 00:41wesley@interaccess.com Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
1997-08-20 23:57Tim GillI write: Well, I don't buy your argument. In my opinion the Rebirth is VERY limited in the
From:
Tim Gill
To:
Nate Harrison [Digital Magician Inc]
Cc:
idm
Date:
Wed, 20 Aug 1997 16:57:31 -0700
Subject:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
permalink · <2.2.32.19970820235731.00679e5c@mail.fishnet.net>
I write: Well, I don't buy your argument. In my opinion the Rebirth is VERY limited in the amount of sounds and emotions that can come out of it. In fact, it is very emotionless...it's main variance is amount of intensity. And, come on, the piano is limited just like ANY single instrument can be. But they are small limits compared to what you CAN do with it. You can create any emotion, any texture, with a piano. And when have you ever hit random keys on the piano and come out with a masterpiece. You have to have talent to compose valid music. With the Rebirth, you don't need talent. As I've said, a monkey could do it.
quoted 33 lines You write:>You write: > >I don't buy this argument. Sure Rebirth is limited, but so are the >original machines. A piano is limited too, but people have managed to >tinker with those for centuries and come up with some amazing music. Of >course a piano is a little more complex (ie more keys and such) but still >I think you could do some nice stuff with Rebirth. Some of my favorite >techno could be taken as 'minimalist' ala Rebirth, like say Drexcyia. AT >times I don't hear much more than 303 type sounds and an 808 or 909. >Somehow they manage to create real eerie pumping techno with 'limited' >instruments. > >I think there is a lot yet to do with something like Rebirth, and I guess >that's why I bought it. To play with it. Figure out it's limitations. >(coming from a non-music background, but also knowing I don't want to make >acid house either). Figure out workarounds, and manipulate them to find a >minimal groove; and I don't mean a Plastikman minimal groove either. Maybe >that's the type of stuff you're referring to, because you pretty much can >make a Plastikmanish track in about 5 minutes. > >peace >Nate > > >Nate Harrison > >Digital Magician Inc. >www.digimagician.com >nate@digimagician.com > >313.994.7316 > >
1997-08-20 21:27Nate Harrison [Digital Magician Inc]Well Tim if you do not buy my argument that's cool, but let me say this: when you wrote I
From:
Nate Harrison [Digital Magician Inc]
To:
Tim Gill
Cc:
idm
Date:
Wed, 20 Aug 1997 21:27:56 +0000 ()
Subject:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
Reply to:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
permalink · <Pine.BSF.3.95.970820204607.15445A-100000@www.webelite.com>
Well Tim if you do not buy my argument that's cool, but let me say this: when you wrote I have a more particular view, I think. Art has to be something that only the person that creates it could have created...all art should be a first... to Random Junk I believe, you hit upon one of the fundamental differences between modern art theory and postmodern art theory. Please allow me to generalize a bit here, because otherwise I could write a book of an email:) In modern art (and I mean visual art, but the trends/ideas I talk about carry into other fields of study), the point was to as you say 'be a first', and thus you have all the 'isms' of art (cubism, surrealism, minimalism, etc). The problem with this was that it cultured a certain elitism in the world of fine art, in particlar painting, where in many artists/subgenres competed with each other saying 'Look my painting is more intelligent than yours, mine is doing something better than yours.' The theory behind the work kept getting more esoteric and obtuse, and in the meantime, the 'first ideas' were being rapidly exhausted. Meanwhile the proponents of postmodernism were trying to redefine the rules of fine art a bit. To extend Random Junk's quote a little, the postmodernists' viewpoint was 'Hey you guys can out-intellectualize each other all you want. All your doing is putting pigment within a frame.' And thus, art truly is what you make it. The postmodernists realized to an extent that there was an end of 'the firsts'. This is why mixed media, collage and references to past styles (ie a -retro- look) is so prevelant in art as well as contempoary imaging all around you. The art of sampling, whether muscially or visually or whatever, is totally postmondern. I believe IDM type music in general is a postmodern art form. You might be wondering how this relates to our debate:) Well of course the Rebirth is limited. In some ways, you're right, you won't be creating anything on it that is a 'first', but what musician out there from AFX to Squarpusher to Orbital etc, is really a 'first'? That is what I meant by understanding the limitations of the medium. Know what it can do, know what it can't do, know what it can do very well. Know what it could do *if* you thought about it a bit. Rebirth can make music. Rebirth cannot make 'new' sounds. Rebirth is very capable of making crappy acid house. Rebirth is also capable of making very beautiful electronic music too, if you sat down and played with it for a few weeks. You're claim that 'a monkey could do it' leads me to beleive you probably sat down with it for a night, discovered it's novelty value, discovered you could basically make Richie Hawtin's entire discography in a night, and dismissed the software as devoid of value. What would happen if you played with it for a few weeks? IMHO you did not discover all the sounds that could come out of it. Sure, they are all 303 sounds, but done in the right way, they could be great. To say that it is 'emtionless' simply means one thing: you my friend haven't spent enough time in front of it! ANd hey, if that 303 sound is not your cup of tea, that's cool too but just know there are plenty of things you could do with Rebirth (as with the TB-303 or TR-808) that defy your notions of unoriginal or emotionless. Sorry for the long email, it's the art school graduate coming out in me:) I have the feeling Random Junk had dabbled a bit in Postmodern clutlure theory too. Peace Nate Nate Harrison Digital Magician Inc. www.digimagician.com nate@digimagician.com 313.994.7316
1997-08-23 20:39wesley@interaccess.comOn Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Tim Gill wrote: > And when have you ever hit > random keys on the pia
From:
wesley@interaccess.com
To:
Tim Gill
Cc:
Nate Harrison \[Digital Magician Inc\] , idm
Date:
Sat, 23 Aug 1997 15:39:20 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
Reply to:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
permalink · <Pine.GSO.3.96.970823152059.5698B-100000@yin.interaccess.com>
On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Tim Gill wrote:
quoted 3 lines And when have you ever hit> And when have you ever hit > random keys on the piano and come out with a masterpiece. You have to have > talent to compose valid music.
Well, the name John Cage does spring to mind...there are probably many examples of masterpieces created by hitting essentially random keys on the piano (I simply am not familiar enough with modern classical music to name them). And I'll state again - talent is not (no longer?) a requirement that must be fufuilled before creating "valid music". If you created a slamming track while fooling around with ReBirth, I would consider it to be every bit as valid as a track created by Photek, Juan Atkins, etc. What you have to rememeber is that "valid" is not a universally defined concept. I consider noise music to be "valid" but many either do not or do not even think that it is music. Play some IDM for your grandparents and you might get the old "What the hell is this noise? This isn't music!" reaction. Music is no longer the exclusive property of the formally educated.
quoted 1 line With the Rebirth, you don't need talent. As I've said, a monkey could do it.> With the Rebirth, you don't need talent. As I've said, a monkey could do it.
I keep meaning to let my monkey try it out, but the fucker always gets bananas all over my computer every time he uses it. Out 2 Lunch With Lunchmeat, Paul wesley@interaccess.com
1997-08-25 22:42Mark KolmarOn Sat, 23 Aug 1997, wesley@interaccess.com wrote: > On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Tim Gill wrote:
From:
Mark Kolmar
To:
idm
Date:
Mon, 25 Aug 1997 17:42:15 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:
Re: (idm) knob-twisting monkey music
Reply to:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
permalink · <Pine.SOL.3.95.970825171943.12449D-100000@typhoon>
On Sat, 23 Aug 1997, wesley@interaccess.com wrote:
quoted 8 lines On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Tim Gill wrote:> On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Tim Gill wrote: > > And when have you ever hit > > random keys on the piano and come out with a masterpiece. You have to have > > talent to compose valid music. > Well, the name John Cage does spring to mind...there are probably many > examples of masterpieces created by hitting essentially random keys on the > piano (I simply am not familiar enough with modern classical music to name > them).
Without starting a dissertation about Cage's compositional techniques, let me at least try to clear up a common misunderstanding. Cage was not concerned with randomness, but rather indeterminacy -- a fine but important distinction. Cage used techniques such as using the I Ching to arrange short phrases (Music of Changes), or allowing varying degrees of freedom to the players so the outcome is unpredictable within certain parameters (Fifty-Eight, the "time pieces"). One of the keys is to formulate the question so that any answer gives an acceptable result. But that is not random; it's an attempt to remove personal taste from one stage of the process, in order to open new possibilities. There's a link from my homepage that compiles some of my rants about this general area of discussion. A well-stocked library may have some books by Cage. I'd suggest _Silence_ if you can find it. --Mark __ <http://www.xnet.com/~mkolmar/BurningRome> ==> MPEG audio clips <== m u s i c : w e b : s o u n d d e s i g n : h t m l : c g i : e t c "We invented machines in order to reduce our work. Now that we have them, we think we should go on working." (John Cage)
1997-08-26 00:28Tim Fothergill F. Ciencias Dpto. BiologiaOn Sat, 23 Aug 1997, wesley@interaccess.com wrote: > > Music is no longer the exclusive pr
From:
Tim Fothergill F. Ciencias Dpto. Biologia
To:
wesley@interaccess.com
Cc:
Tim Gill , Nate Harrison [Digital Magician Inc] , idm
Date:
Mon, 25 Aug 1997 20:28:40 -0400 (CST)
Subject:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
Reply to:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
permalink · <Pine.GSO.3.96.970825202556.7935B-100000@abello>
On Sat, 23 Aug 1997, wesley@interaccess.com wrote:
quoted 3 lines Music is no longer the exclusive property of the formally educated.> > Music is no longer the exclusive property of the formally educated. >
Have to say that I don't think music has ever been the exclusive property of the formally educated, just the means to reproduce if faithfully in the written form. There are many folk traditions that involve father passing music to son via physically showing them how to play things, very informal education. Does this mean that IDM is part of a folk tradition? Just a thought.
quoted 8 lines Out 2 Lunch With Lunchmeat,> > Out 2 Lunch With Lunchmeat, > > Paul > wesley@interaccess.com > > >
Tim Those who set out to serve both God and Mammon soon find there is no God.
1997-08-26 00:41wesley@interaccess.com> > Music is no longer the exclusive property of the formally educated. > > Have to say th
From:
wesley@interaccess.com
To:
Tim Fothergill F. Ciencias Dpto. Biologia
Cc:
idm
Date:
Mon, 25 Aug 1997 19:41:43 -0500 (CDT)
Subject:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
Reply to:
Re: (idm) Propellerhead...or the Cool-io Synth
permalink · <Pine.GSO.3.96.970825192900.1067B-100000@yin.interaccess.com>
quoted 7 lines Music is no longer the exclusive property of the formally educated.> > Music is no longer the exclusive property of the formally educated. > > Have to say that I don't think music has ever been the exclusive property > of the formally educated, just the means to reproduce if faithfully in the > written form. There are many folk traditions that involve father passing > music to son via physically showing them how to play things, very informal > education.
I thought about what it was that I was trying to say for a long time before I wrote the above line, and I think I failed to get my point across. What I meant is that it has traditionally been frowned upon for people to declare themselves musicians without having some sort of training on their instruments. Just as an overwhelming majority of Americans and Europeans would be upset if I declared myself a piano player without being able to read music, play songs, etc., I would imagine that Africans and Chinese people would be similarly chagined were I to declare myself a kora or pipa player. None the more clearly yours, Paul wesley2interaccess.com