IDM Mailing Archive

quoted 3 lines The problem is that, within the

>>> The problem is that, within the >>> parameters of a given culture, the average person can only enjoy, or >>> tolerate, a certain level of departure from the norm.

quoted 7 lines I find this to be true even for many people who are into industrial,

>>I find this to be true even for many people who are into industrial, >>i.d.m., and other styles at varying distances from the mainstream. >>People get a certain idea of what "industrial" or "electro" or "metal" is >>supposed to be, and generally don't seem to want to be bothered with >>something at the edges of these styles, or something that crosses the >>lines between them. These are people who define themselves as >>adventurous and open to new experience.

But, then there are people who only believe in pursuing the purest realms of established "experimental" music, instead of creating something truly new or a untried fusion of different elements. This is a two sided coin. You may end up with a masterpiece, but more likely, you end up with something monostylistically boring. Experimental musicians often categorically regect mainstream music styles. This is also not open minded. One of the best tools in musical composition is contrast. Stylistic contrast can be quite effective. That is why I think "mu-ziq vs. the Auteurs" is so cool. Orbital and the Orb also mix experimentalism and populist appeal quite well. Don't get me wrong, I really like extreme music. It is just that if you return to something "normal" and then veer out to something experimental, you can accentuate and dramatize the difference.

quoted 5 lines And this is very much so among the "art-music" or academic crowd. I

>And this is very much so among the "art-music" or academic crowd. I >decided not to pursue a Master's degree in composition. I earned A's in >comp courses, but these were for electronic music. My professors >understood what I was doing but warned that those who would evaluate my >portfolio would not, unless I slipped in a few string quartets.

It is best to destroy an institution from the inside. Wouldn't it be better to write a string quartet that blows their closed minds. Or would it not be worth the effort. I guess I always meant to and still haven't gotten around to it. I also started my masters in composition and haven't gotten around to finishing it, largely for the same reasons that you didn't start. I failed to include names for all the quotes above. Hopefully you all know who you are or were. Sorry about the confusion if you don't, but I deleted everything and can't remember who said what now. - Paul

quoted 10 lines My answer to that is, have _you_ ever heard the Yamaha VL-1? Everybody I

> My answer to that is, have _you_ ever heard the Yamaha VL-1? Everybody I > know who is a musician of any sort drops their jaw and starts babbling > incoherently after they've played with it for awhile. It's a new paradigm. > A whole new slice of the palette. It remains to be seen what becomes of it. > Especially after somebody designs the next generation, which starts to model > things which *don't* exist in nature instrument-wise. Let's see, how about > a 100 foot long digeridoo, what'll that sound like, that'll be a good start ... > etc. Then I'll wait for the Enos and the Richard Jameses of the world who > explicitly explore what the machines were *not* "meant" to do, and see where > they get with them.

Can you elaborate a bit on this VL-1? regards Snow

On Sat, 18 Mar 1995, Eylon Israeli wrote:

quoted 1 line Can you elaborate a bit on this VL-1?

> Can you elaborate a bit on this VL-1?

If I'm thinking of the right machine...this thing, first of all, is quite expensive: roughly $6K as I recall. It's sole purpose is to do physical modelling of wind instruments. You specify things like what the reed is made from, the length and diameter of the instrument, what the body is made from, and so forth. And by sophisticated mathematical magic, it synthesizes it. I studied electronic and computer music at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Analyzing and recreating the sounds of acoustic instruments (and voice) was an area people were working on deeply. I heard, for example, a computer program that modelled a trumpet, and one that did an amazing sub-bass human voice. This may seem like a purely academic exercise--and to some extent it is. But being able to realistically recreate the sound of existing acoustic instruments leads the way toward understanding exactly how these instruments behave: how the timbre changes as the instrument is played softly and loudly, how it behaves over the range of the instrument, etc. One goal would be the ability to accurately synthesize the sound of a physical object that would be impractical or practically impossible to make in reality. Fifty foot steel hammer smashing down on Stonehenge. A contrabassoon made from aluminum. Etc.