"I don't think the utilities *are* instruments(usually). As I've mentioned
on this newsgroup before, I believe that they're more akin to filters in
Photoshop. Often times these tools are more like the fuzzbox or delay pedal
a guitarist uses." "Perhaps audio is now suffering from a bit of "Star Wars"
fever at this point, all wrapped up in special effects and having difficulty
saying anything really interesting."
** this is true. and the photoshop filter analogy has been made before:
--
Date: Sun, 08 Aug 1999 11:26:49 -0400
From: Dave Walker <marmoset@mich.com>
To: idm mailing list
quoted 1 line okay okay, i give up. what's the DSP plugin?
> okay okay, i give up. what's the DSP plugin?
If you've ever used Photoshop (or a similar program)
for graphics, you've used the various plugins for
sharpening, blurring, distorting, whatever the
pixels on screen. Lots of audio software these
days (ProTools, for example) allows you to,
in a similar fashion, do transformations on
recorded audio. DSP stands for Digital Signal
Processing.
Remember all those horrible CD covers that
were basically photos that someone's
little sister had taken, with about
a dozen Photoshop filters applied haphazardly
to them? Remember after a while that
people came to their senses and realized
that this stuff wasn't really impressing
anyone who'd ever sat down in front of
a photo editing application for a couple
of minutes?
Welcome to a big chunk of IDM in 1999.
--
Mr. Reynolds: "But like the legion of IDM producers he's influenced, James
seems paradoxically trapped by the "infinite possibilities" offered by
today's software and plug-ins (the computer-music equivalent of guitar
pedals), resulting in infinitesimally detailed tweakage, but no song-shapes
or moodscapes that actually leave an imprint in your memory, let alone your
heart."
** the problem now is that afx is not who i think should be being dissed on.
there are so many opinions about the new afx album. when it came out there
were 1-star ratings in all the magazines and people had listened to it once
perhaps. there was talk elsewhere, here maybe, can't remember, about it
sounding very -'demo-y' and 'unpolished', which means it wasn't
ultra-DSP-ified (which would make sense, he purposefully is not focusing on
DSP). but now it is called a DSP-wank. i feel afx and squarepusher and
autechre (the 3 guys reynolds mentioned) are using the new technology for
their own purposeful purposes. they really know what they are doing. i would
like it if more people tried to understand it opposed to dissing everything
by the 'established artists' (why is there the idea that they all have
forgotten how to make good music rather than they are getting closer and
closer to [or are just still close to] what they want? why is confield still
called "ultra-abstruse" - once you hear it a few times everything is
expected; you get used to it). then if they don't like the feelings it gives
or whatnot, good, but to say it doesn't give feelings...? while he says "no
song-shapes or moodscapes that actually leave an imprint in your memory, let
alone your heart" as his conclusion or whatnot, all of the songs on the
latest albums by these guys do just that. they contain some intense songs;
how can i not remember them? while i'm here i want to remind people to try
out freeform's latest "..vietnam & china" and phthalocyanine's on planet-mu.
there's something happening!
i wonder if the new Boards will be in unfaves2002.htm?
also is it me or is the new global goon not as fun as he is usually?
christopho
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
http://sports.yahoo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org