quoted 2 lines aphex really doesn¹t care and is just finishing up his obligations and> aphex really doesn¹t care and is just finishing up his obligations and
> contract with warp.
I hope that's the case---maybe he's been saving all the brilliant,
groundbreaking stuff for another label? Wow, what an album that might be
when it comes out!
quoted 4 lines As for software or DSP. Don¹t blame the tools. Blame the people and how they> As for software or DSP. Don¹t blame the tools. Blame the people and how they
> use them. Im sick of hearing this complaint. Granular synthesis or max.msp
> or time stretching or any other way of manipulating a sound that is popular
> right now arent bad in themselves. Its how people use them.
...
quoted 2 lines as a very positive thing. It opens up our palette of sounds available to us> as a very positive thing. It opens up our palette of sounds available to us
> and that is a beautiful thing. As a composer, you want to have all sounds,
...
quoted 1 line People are so negative about dsp (digital signal processing), but I see it> People are so negative about dsp (digital signal processing), but I see it
I *am* blaming how DSP is used, not the tools: hence my reference to
"DSP-fuckery" and "the obsession with *certain* facile, homogenizing
DSP effects" in general, and my mention of "bouncing ball percussion" and
"the cher effect" in particular. That they are DSP is a happenstance
(virtually everything is dsp now) and their digitalness is not what I am
criticizing.
I wouldn't comment, but I've seen this a million times. A defense of DSP in
general makes no sense as a response to criticism of particular cliches.
And I think we see the latter much more often---I don't know how anyone
aware of how *any* music is produced nowadays could seriously argue
against the fact of DSP use in and of itself, or disagree with the obvious
points about DSP opening up the palette of available sounds. Why DSP
itself would need defense on a list with so many musicians is a mystery
to me.
If there are a lot of people actually being "so negative about dsp" in
and of itself, I would presume they're *not* the same people as the
majority who you described as "yearning for the chiastic / envane /
cichli" sound, as these were arguably the most DSP-heavy albums of the
time. I think people are mostly negative about gratuitous and cliche uses,
not about all uses (or they would have run screaming from the genre around
1995).
I will grant that my reference to specific software programs at the end
was a little unclear---sorry if that part of the rant made it sound as if
there was an argument against DSP being made. The whole bit was really
more of a dig at the "idm kids who buy a computer and throw the amen break
into a granular synthesis preset patch in reaktor and then release it a week
later" crowd, as you put it so well :-) That's mostly why I brought up the
glitch-dancing thing---after all there had to be a market for it. I almost
started bitching about the overuse of Derrida-esque pomo-fluff in a lot of
press idm reviews over the past years, but I figured the review would
never be over if I did.
I myself almost never use actual hardware (unless a singing girl counts).
quoted 3 lines listening to amber or I care because you do........find the stuff you like> listening to amber or I care because you do........find the stuff you like
> and write positive things about that. Id rather hear a glowing review of a
> record that someone loves and has spent time with than yet another bitter
I'd been writing reviews again and might post some. (I've been listening
to hardly any IDM lately, so it might be OT but if people don't mind...)
I promise they're not all negative.
--
@@@ david o'toole
@@@ dto@gnu.org
@@@ www.gnu.org/software/octal
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org