IDM Mailing Archive

quoted 20 lines <anthony@phatmac.demon.co.uk> writes:

><anthony@phatmac.demon.co.uk> writes: > >> I'm well up for a slanging match with any of you IDM is my world types >> out there, so it there's life enough in ya, bring it on! > >Well, it's late, but I'll try my luck. Not that I'm one of these purists >you mention, but I suppose I did say the following: > >>> Autechre are less guilty of stealing a particular sound than someone who >>> physically 'plays' an instrument because they select sounds for their >>> records based on lots of different sounds they make. In other words they >>> sculpt the sound. Playing a 'real' instrument involves sound >>> manipulation, but essentially the sound has already been defined. > >> Bollocks, it seems you trying to suggest that synths somehow have a more >> expressive capability than 'real' acoustic instruments > >No, because I don't believe they necessarily have. But I do believe that >what they lack in expression of one particular sound, they make up for >in being able to express a wider variety of different sounds.

Being able to access/play more sounds is not a mark of expression but multitimbriality? I think expression covers the range of sound that one particular sound or instrument can make, this doesn't collectively mean all the sounds on your synth/samper but one sound. Who are Autechre able to express a wider variety of sounds than?

quoted 7 lines Even on the most simple level you try hitting a key

> >> Even on the most simple level you try hitting a key >> on a keyboard playing a bass guitar patch, sure the sound gets louder and >> the timbre of it changes the harder you hit it > >Yeah, so it's not exactly like the real thing - and there's less >expression...

Thankyou... Is music not all about expression? If not what!

quoted 10 lines But going back to the bass patch. When did you last here one of these

> >But going back to the bass patch. When did you last here one of these >sounds on the >records talked about here on IDM? Aphex's 'Richard D. James' LP is the >only one I can think of offhand. Most of these musicians are moving away >from this kind of >pick and mix sound which defined early house and techno into one where >they have more freedom to chosen their own sounds (mostly by sampling). >If your aim is to be original, surely by having a choice of more sounds >you have the opportunity to get nearer to the sound that you desire.

I haven't advocated solely using acoustic gear, nor hinted at it - but both types of instrument have pros and cons of use, surely the way to be open to the widest range of sounds is to use both types of acoustic & electronic instruments...

quoted 5 lines if you did this [hit the string really hard] on a real

> >> if you did this [hit the string really hard] on a real >> bass you'll get to the point where the string will break > >I don't quite know what you're getting at here.

Yeah, I'm trying to explain the synthetic reality of a synth/sampler you can only play notes from and to a certian velocity beyond which nothing exists, don't you find this weird. I guess I must be frustrated because I've just done a D 'n' B tune with a slap bass in it, which doesn't sound anything as full as I would like it to, despite doubling patches, and spending hours manipulating EQ, aftertouch, expression, and pitch bend...

quoted 9 lines Playing a live instrument in a versatile manner takes a lot of time. Not

>Playing a live instrument in a versatile manner takes a lot of time. Not >many people have the time it takes to play a wide variety of instruments >well (you don't have to play it well, but if you don't you are less >versatile) and this is where we get back to the subject of >collaborations. Collaborating with other musicians gives you more >freedom of sound - and >I think this is what Bjork is looking for when she records with >Plaid/Mark Bell etc. >As has been said before she is a singer/songwriter more than a musician,

I agree!

quoted 10 lines She probably could sit down and learn how to do it all herself, but if

>She probably could sit down and learn how to do it all herself, but if >this doesn't work for her (which would seem to be the case) proves less >satisfying and the end product turns out to be worse, why bother? It's a >matter of being versatile and choosing the sound in any way you can >(even by choosing which musicians you work with) and not letting the >sound choose you. In my opinion, versatility can equal originality with >the right person at the controls, and those artists out on a limb (such >as Autechre) and isolated from any one scene, do tend to make music that >sounds more individualistic and therefore is more original. >

I don't know, I was never really talking about Bjork, I feel there is an intangeable quality musicians often inject into music, somthing that is unique, some feeling... Whereas with an outfit like Autechre, anybody who knows how to manipulate gear a bit can come up with Autechresque style sounds, and throw in some crackly fusion and within a few months they might have already produced something very Autechre, I know I've had a string of demos which show this. With someone like Miles Davis how long would it take to emulate his style, and not only that, the styles of the musicians he works with. What I'm saying is, isn't worth having an individual style that is hard to emmulate rather than focusing on just sounds and random arrangemnt, as 1000's of others can copy this easily simply because they can use the same gear and programs. Synths create a world which define extremes and shift between them in a programmed fashion. The only instrument on the planet which can break such a monotony is *your* mind.