IDM Mailing Archive

man, hopefully you are kidding or else you must be both rich and also the musical gadget industry's best customer! The sound created by organic means is infinitely more complex and beautiful than the sound generated by DSP processes.... I would consider the sound of a waterfall for instance or the ocean or insects at night (and not on CD) to be greater than the entire output of all IDM artists put together.... probably greater than all sounds made by humanity itself throughout our entire history.... In the same way as a real sunset is more beautiful than any work of art or photography by humans... Of course this is my bias... maybe some of you think a dog turd on the sidewalk is the most beautiful thing... it is still nature.... in essence, DSP processes are at their root natural, because math and the physics of sound on which the algorithims are based originate in nature, but they are like the genetic engineering of sound... they are like the human reductionistic tendency taken to the extreme and applied to the nature of sound... I am sure that whatever music you create using Kyma or whatever will have melody in it, right? or rythym???? if it doesn't have melody, rythym, tones, etc.... is it music? is noise music? is silence music? is my fart music? anyway... peace out.... I need to get back to work writing code..... Andrew Schrock wrote:

quoted 10 lines If you're not using technology developed within the last 6 months, you're

> > If you're not using technology developed within the last 6 months, you're > a reflection of the past. Please, if you have a serious dedication towards > forwarding electronic music technology, don't use any synthesizers or > samplers. > > Andrew > > PS: Anybody not using Kyma is a fag too, Atom Heart and Autechre, you are > the only ones off the hook.

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 16 lines The sound created by organic means is infinitely more complex and

>The sound created by organic means is infinitely more complex and >beautiful than the sound generated by DSP processes.... I would consider >the sound of a waterfall for instance or the ocean or insects at night >(and not on CD) to be greater than the entire output of all IDM artists >put together.... probably greater than all sounds made by humanity >itself throughout our entire history.... In the same way as a real >sunset is more beautiful than any work of art or photography by >humans... Of course this is my bias... maybe some of you think a dog >turd on the sidewalk is the most beautiful thing... it is still >nature.... > >in essence, DSP processes are at their root natural, because math and >the physics of sound on which the algorithims are based originate in >nature, but they are like the genetic engineering of sound... they are >like the human reductionistic tendency taken to the extreme and applied >to the nature of sound...

Same with violins, etc. They're all still man-made; it's not like there's some cello tree in south africa or something. We made the instruments we played before, and we make oscillators and we're going to keep making instruments. But, to go along with the natural sounds you mentioned before, how is a waterfall more natural than a drum? How are humans not natural? :P Why is water falling over a rock face more complex than my finger plucking a string? :b

quoted 4 lines I am sure that whatever music you create using Kyma or whatever will

>I am sure that whatever music you create using Kyma or whatever will >have melody in it, right? or rythym???? if it doesn't have melody, >rythym, tones, etc.... is it music? is noise music? is silence music? is >my fart music?

Or burp music - see Mike & Rich. cheers, /derek ------- eggytoast.com ------- now updated daily --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 6 lines I am sure that whatever music you create using Kyma or whatever will

>>I am sure that whatever music you create using Kyma or whatever will >>have melody in it, right? or rythym???? if it doesn't have melody, >>rythym, tones, etc.... is it music? is noise music? is silence music? is >>my fart music? > >Or burp music - see Mike & Rich.

Or Stock, Hausen and Walkman...the 'Hang Ups' 7" has one of the greatest burp-fests of all time. Classic. -- _____ omz _____ Beautamous Loaf Recordings -streaming audio http://www.mp3.com/stations/beautamous_loaf --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

I was just thinking about what makes all of the music I really love great, and it is because the rythym is supplied by a human being, and not a clock. Sequencing and quantization is terrible, lame, sucks, and sounds awful... When will we break free from the limits of sequenced music and how will it be done? is there any software out there that allows for composition without a sequencer? When will electronic music have the powerful rythyms that are found for example in primitive tribal ritualistic drumming???? I am a hipocrite because I use sequencing all the time, but I try like the rest (unsuccessfully) to make it more natural by introducing errors (humainization) but it just isn't the same as natural rythym ideosyncracies because nature isn't random, but chaotic in an emotionally relevant way... computers can only be semi-random and have no emotion at all..... --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

im very curious as to what music you listen to that is not sequenced or quantisized. to me this would mean no measures, time signature, etc. but it is very possible we are working with different definitions of "sequencing", which would screw everything up. would this mean no patterns as well? i ask because to me tribal rythms derive their power (and very powerful they are!) from their patterns. On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Josh Bown wrote:

quoted 20 lines I was just thinking about what makes all of the music I really love

> I was just thinking about what makes all of the music I really love > great, and it is because the rythym is supplied by a human being, and > not a clock. Sequencing and quantization is terrible, lame, sucks, and > sounds awful... When will we break free from the limits of sequenced > music and how will it be done? is there any software out there that > allows for composition without a sequencer? When will electronic music > have the powerful rythyms that are found for example in primitive tribal > ritualistic drumming???? > > I am a hipocrite because I use sequencing all the time, but I try like > the rest (unsuccessfully) to make it more natural by introducing errors > (humainization) but it just isn't the same as natural rythym > ideosyncracies because nature isn't random, but chaotic in an > emotionally relevant way... computers can only be semi-random and have > no emotion at all..... > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org >

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

on 4/10/01 4:49 PM, idm-digest-help@hyperreal.org at idm-digest-help@hyperreal.org wrote:

quoted 5 lines Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:05:42 -0700

> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:05:42 -0700 > To: idm@hyperreal.org > From: Josh Bown <josh@undertone.com> > Subject: Southpacific > Message-ID: <3AD375A6.D8817DAC@undertone.com>

quoted 14 lines Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:09:59 -0700

> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:09:59 -0700 > To: idm@hyperreal.org > From: Josh Bown <josh@undertone.com> > Subject: sequencing is lame > Message-ID: <3AD376A7.CFA13008@undertone.com> > > I was just thinking about what makes all of the music I really love > great, and it is because the rythym is supplied by a human being, and > not a clock. Sequencing and quantization is terrible, lame, sucks, and > sounds awful... When will we break free from the limits of sequenced > music and how will it be done? is there any software out there that > allows for composition without a sequencer? When will electronic music > have the powerful rythyms that are found for example in primitive tribal > ritualistic drumming????

it's there its what you make of it. rhythms have never changed, Josh! you can more than replicate their (tribal) rhythms in sequencing. what is usually NOT replicated is the soul and the meaning in which they hit the drums. Which say, a recorded one-measure loop of them playing would NOT accomplish. peex. delph --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

is there any software out there that allows for composition without a sequencer? ------------------------------------------------- yes. dig into www.cycling74.com (not for pc users / mac only) max/msp, thats where its at. I am usng the lloopp player, you'll find it in the annotaed guide to max and msp extras, I was using buzz but decided that the more free-form real-time processing availible is much more interesting, I have the same sentiment towards sequencers. If your into the mego school of thought i really suggest you look into max/msp and also nato- msp objects that allow you to fuck up video. So I quess next people are going to complain about video artists using nato who have no offical video or film schooling. Man you guys, fucking relax, you all sound like my dad. actually my dad's been dead for a long time. Anyhow all the max/msp stuff tends to lean into more micro stuff, so most of you prob. wont have much interest, personally I dont care all that much about how well trained a person is, I am more interested in the ideas and process behind something then how perfectly arragned it is. (hint- all the punks are over at microsound). hehehe. after all, we are all going be food for worms soon enough, so lighten up on the boring threads, and maybe I'll spell check one of these posts one day. : P _____________----______--_______________________ scott_allison multimedia_designer / information_architect mediacentric_group -------------11111————-____————— ++++++ ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] .........................!!!!!!!!!!!!! 00000 ____^^^^^^^^^^ ---------- /////////************************ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

there are also ways to really use a sequencing program differently and come up with weirder stuff - you gotta' break the rules and stuff - one thing to do is use a sequencer with a sampling keyboard and don't use normal musical samples - also using the looping feature on a sequencer can be fun - for example having different tracks be different lengths but looping them all - also playing back normal sequences on keyboards that aren't set up with the right sounds ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Allison" <Scott_Allison@Mediacentric.com> To: <idm@hyperreal.org> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 6:05 PM Subject: [idm] sequencing is lame is there any software out there that allows for composition without a sequencer? ------------------------------------------------- yes. dig into www.cycling74.com (not for pc users / mac only) max/msp, thats where its at. I am usng the lloopp player, you'll find it in the annotaed guide to max and msp extras, I was using buzz but decided that the more free-form real-time processing availible is much more interesting, I have the same sentiment towards sequencers. If your into the mego school of thought i really suggest you look into max/msp and also nato- msp objects that allow you to fuck up video. So I quess next people are going to complain about video artists using nato who have no offical video or film schooling. Man you guys, fucking relax, you all sound like my dad. actually my dad's been dead for a long time. Anyhow all the max/msp stuff tends to lean into more micro stuff, so most of you prob. wont have much interest, personally I dont care all that much about how well trained a person is, I am more interested in the ideas and process behind something then how perfectly arragned it is. (hint- all the punks are over at microsound). hehehe. after all, we are all going be food for worms soon enough, so lighten up on the boring threads, and maybe I'll spell check one of these posts one day. : P _____________----______--_______________________ scott_allison multimedia_designer / information_architect mediacentric_group -------------11111————-____————— ++++++ ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] .........................!!!!!!!!!!!!! 00000 ____^^^^^^^^^^ ---------- /////////************************ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

I think referring to music as "sequenced" or "quantized" really implies "pre-sequenced" or "pre-quantized". So yeah, there is always temporal structure, but the difference is between music where the structure is determined before the performance, and where the structure - both micro and macro - comes into existence as the performance occurs. Matt At 04:58 PM 4/10/01 -0500, b. fagan wrote:

quoted 34 lines im very curious as to what music you listen to that is not sequenced or

>im very curious as to what music you listen to that is not sequenced or >quantisized. to me this would mean no measures, time signature, etc. but >it is very possible we are working with different definitions of >"sequencing", which would screw everything up. would this mean no >patterns as well? i ask because to me tribal rythms derive their power >(and very powerful they are!) from their patterns. > >On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Josh Bown wrote: > > > I was just thinking about what makes all of the music I really love > > great, and it is because the rythym is supplied by a human being, and > > not a clock. Sequencing and quantization is terrible, lame, sucks, and > > sounds awful... When will we break free from the limits of sequenced > > music and how will it be done? is there any software out there that > > allows for composition without a sequencer? When will electronic music > > have the powerful rythyms that are found for example in primitive tribal > > ritualistic drumming???? > > > > I am a hipocrite because I use sequencing all the time, but I try like > > the rest (unsuccessfully) to make it more natural by introducing errors > > (humainization) but it just isn't the same as natural rythym > > ideosyncracies because nature isn't random, but chaotic in an > > emotionally relevant way... computers can only be semi-random and have > > no emotion at all..... > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org >For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

okay, you're just asking for it.

quoted 6 lines I am a hipocrite because I use sequencing all the time, but I try like

> I am a hipocrite because I use sequencing all the time, but I try like > the rest (unsuccessfully) to make it more natural by introducing errors > (humainization) but it just isn't the same as natural rythym > ideosyncracies because nature isn't random, but chaotic in an > emotionally relevant way... computers can only be semi-random and have > no emotion at all.....

that you prefer a "natural" rhythm (such as that which can be attained by banging on an actual "drum") is your opinion entirely & i won't discuss that since there's no point. in fact, there are times when i certainly prefer a live drummer & others when i absolutely love the machine sound. the question "which is better?" has no answer, or even relevance. it entirely depends on your preference & no empirical fact can ever be used to support either side. so something like "nature isn't random, but chaotic in an emotionally relevant way" might mean something poetic on its own, but as an argument against machine beats, it holds no water whatsoever. in fact, & this is why i bother tackling the point... i really think it one of the shoddiest excuse for argument when people start throwing the word "emotion" around gratuitously. "emotion" is a vague term which can be used to justify pretty much any position. computers have no emotions? then does the snare drum have emotion? no, you'll say, but it's "chaotic in an emotionally relevant way". yet i can make a beat with fruity loops that is emotionally relevant to me, so emotions actually play no part in the problem or the solution. the problem is simply that machine beats sound too dry for some (& extremely enjoyable to others), which is a constatation relevant only to psychologists & semiologists who desire to study the phenomenon of sound preference. now, as for ways to make machine sounds more "chaotic", there are a number of approaches which one can take. one thing i've learned is that it's useful to think metaphorically in these cases. for instance, within fruity loops, there's an option where you can humanize your beats slightly by randomly assigning a given channel to another one, which is not chaos proper, but it gives the impression of chaos & actually doesn't sound random. also, for slightly off-beat rhythms (mimicking human sloppiness), there's nothing preventing you from touching up your samples & adding a few hundredths of seconds of silence before the actual drum sound (sure, this takes time, but what do you think richard devine does when he makes music? that he just pushes the "RICHIE DEVINE AUTOMATIC SOUND BUTTON" & then "record"?) there are also a number of dsp techniques which, while they don't strictly imitate human sloppiness, do help diversifying the beat which makes it more exciting to listen to. run audiomulch & use your granulator (ever so slightly, so it doesn't end up sounding like a mego record, though that can be interesting too) & you get an effect that is not plain randomness, & brings in what i would call "machine sloppiness", itself different from the aforementioned human sloppiness which makes live recordings so good (& sometimes so self-indulgent) but similar if you think of it metaphorically. a recent example of this can be found on track 5 of frank bretschneider's recent CD _curve_ (mille plateaux): the drum loop contains subtle variations in volume, giving it a surprisingly "mellowed down" feel where one would expect crispated bits. as a sidenote, this is a rather nice CD for those into minimal beats veering away from the good old house tricks. obviously, there's also the good old technique of just sampling a live drum beat & using it verbatim, but i'm sort of sick of that personally. apart from say amon tobin, whose CD _bricolage_ (ninja tune) remains an absolute classic in that respect, there are not many who do that sort of thing properly. i just think that the trick gets old quick when that's all there is to a song. the bottom line is that machine music requires more than special techniques; it also requires a different mode of listening. & thank god for it; if a computer were just the same as a live drum, what good would it be? ~ david --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org