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

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Christophe McKeon
To:
Date:
Thu, 09 Mar 2000 18:53:35 -0500
Subject:
(idm) digital acoustics/ equipment talk/ soft vs. hard
Msg-Id:
<38C8397D.5B7FE922@rcn.com>
Mbox:
idm.0003.gz
Hello all, What I keep seeing on these threads is a completely untenable, and quite perplexing tendency to differentiate between "real" and "not real" sounds. The former, having been produced by "musical instruments" or by a recording them from the "real world". And the latter being that which is generated/modified by some kind of logic engine. Since when is what goes on inside of a computer, the kind that rests on your desk, or at the top of your spinal column for instance, not "real". A computer being manipulated in such a fashion as to produce such and such a sound is a very real event, in a very tangible sense. It is no less "real" than banging two sticks together. This is really a very old and tired metaphysical debate rearing it's head once again. The absence of realness or thingness, or whatever you want to call it, just simply does not exist. On a more practical tangent: If you like twiddling your knob, buy a knob controller. Regards, Christophe P.S. What the fuck does Eno know about Africa. Lukas Bergstrom wrote:
quoted 45 lines From: Lee Azzarello <roswell@antioch-college.edu>> > From: Lee Azzarello <roswell@antioch-college.edu> > > Subject: Re: (idm) Re: lets talk equip. > > > > >ajwells@ix.netcom.com wrote this on 3/8/00 1:32 PM > > > >removes the artist from the reality that sound emanates from THINGS > > >vibrating, not numbers approximating waves... that physical quality of > > >sound is often lost or changed in a computer environment... > > > > I don't understand. I mean, speaking of electronic music, there is > > nothing that vibrates, or even moves inside analog _or_ digital > > equipment. > > I understand the necessity of > > physical vibrations with non-electronic music (being a classical pianist > > myself), I still haven't found a sampled piano that sounds anything like > > the Steinway Grand in the hall I practice in. > > Actually...these two comments triggered some thoughts about psychoacoustics > I've had. Bear with me. Every time you hear a sound, your brain instantly > attempts to extract a variety of information from it: where is it, what is > it, is it moving...the brain assumes that there will be some acoustical cues > to help it along, and can recognize when the acoustical properties of a > sound aren't "valid". Such sounds (like a perfect, repeating sine wave, for > example) sound artificial. Real-world sounds tend to be messier and more > complex. Check this article > http://unisci.com/stories/20001/0306006.htm > for an example of the kind of information people can extract from sounds, > beyond location. > Now I'm not suggested that every artist sculpt their sounds until they sound > like something produced by a real object. ep7 has a bunch of sounds that > have been folded in on themselves so many times that they've got some really > engaging acoustical properties, but they don't by any stretch of the > imagination sound real. I just wish more producers thought about acoustics, > instead of just sampling and filtering mindlessly (like jungle producers > looking for a natural sound, and then time-stretching their drum samples all > to hell.) > > Final thought for the day: people should play more games with their > speakers. > > Lukas > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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