On Mon, 19 Feb 1996, Martin Ayrton wrote:
quoted 5 lines Also on the LIVE front I'm strongly against the people using DAT on> Also on the LIVE front I'm strongly against the people using DAT on
> stage. we (the mobeus) use an EMAXII which provides the sequence lines,
> you may argue that is just the same as DAT however the Emax provides
> trigger sync to an SH-101 and two Pro-1's. The internal sequencers
> are programmed live, [etc, etc, rest of the message deleted]
I have to disagree on this and say (once again) that it really depends on
what kind of music is being played. We (Ruumen) use DAT, because it works
for us. First of all, our music is quite arranged from top to bottom,
with four people playing live instruments (violin, flute, bass and irish
buzuki). Even if I would drag all of my stuff (Atari, Akai sampler,
etc...) on a gig, it wouldn«t bring more improvisation to our music,
because the complexity of our music doesn«t allow it. So, as a result, I
use a normal DAT and just mix the band live. I know the music inside out
(well, I program it) so I can mix it better than any outside soundman.
One thing I do, is using the DAT to supply two mono tracks (opposed to
one stereo), so I can have one track of beats and one of bass (we use
both live and programmed bass) or two different tracks of beats or
whatever, so I have a little freedom at gigs. I also use lots of effects,
many of which are older ones with knobs, so I can change them on the fly
and, once again, improvise a little.
But I do agree that it isn«t really credible if someone uses DAT just to get
more time to jump up and down. But I wouldn«t say that the use of DAT
makes music better or worse. I wouldn«t care less if Bon Jovi would use
DAT for backing tracks (they propable are!). Bullshit is bullshit. Even
from DAT!
Teemu
from: Teemu ---> tkorpipa@siba.fi
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
'I can't forget...
but I don't remember what'
-Leonard Cohen-