On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 1:51 AM Laurent Knauth <laurent.knauth@gmail.com> wrote:
quoted 1 line Plus the waveform displays confirm they didn't conform to the pop structure !> Plus the waveform displays confirm they didn't conform to the pop structure !
I never examined their waveforms, yet somehow I knew that they don't
conform to the pop structure!
Around 36:33 in the Milan set starts a focused, almost conventional
rhythmically section that would stand alone as a track. I don't know
where I'd cut it off as an edit. I love the way the last half of the
set sounds like a drummer on the autism spectrum sitting in a hallway
that opens up to several orchestras rehearsing, jamming along with the
collision of all the orchestras.
It makes more sense to compare an Autechre show to other live
electro-acoustic shows. What they've done is constructed a performance
method that combines really detailed prior programming (editing and
tuning elaborate Max/MSP patches) with live improvisations. In other
words they have bespoke computer programs, which they've instrumented
with knobs, dials, and switches. So their live performances explore
the possibilities of the program by tweaking the 'handles' they've
attached to a stunningly complex sound generator.
They also have 2 patches running on two laptops and I'm betting that
control signals flow back and forth between them. So as Rob is knob
twiddling, his Max patch is modulating Sean's Max patch, and vice
versa.
Given the chaos and non-linearity built into their programming, it's
better to imagine them trying to ride wild animals and keep them
running in more or less the same direction.
The thing that impresses me most with how they program their live sets
is that they've managed to include guard rails to keep the patches
from going non-linear and sending horrible full-volume harsh noise to
the PA speakers. Digital signal processing is an endless battle to
produce usable results without blowing up the numerical computations.