Re: electroacoustics - rap to tap to zap to frap


Subject: Re: electroacoustics - rap to tap to zap to frap
From: Rick Nance (rnance@dmu.ac.uk)
Date: Thu Aug 05 2004 - 17:47:28 EDT


But back on an inanely simpler level.

It seems then that if you CONSIDER the algorithm itself to be the
material, then you are doing computer music?

I've never thought about myself as a computer musician, although I use
computers constantly. I tend to think of the material as the recorded
sources. But when you say rote thinking, wouldn't rote manual labor be
more to the point?
Getting somebody to cut your tapes into thousands of tiny bits and paste
them back together might be a slow way to do granulation, but it could
work. So would building ceramic resonators, using 60ips tape and
changing speeds, and spinning bundles of speaker cones between
microphones might make an interesting shuffler.

It's reminiscent of when I was a graphic designer. Before computers
entered the picture it was produced on a large table with knives and
pens. After the computer moved in, the ideas of design pretty much
stayed the same. The production methods differed and sometimes they were
faster. Some of the middle men got removed (actually retrained) by software.

R

Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:

> At 04:26 PM 8/5/04 -0400, gogins@pipeline.com wrote:
>
>>I think the question of machine composition can be parsed quite simply on
>>the basis of responsibility.{...} The software speeds up certain kinds of rote
>>thinking to an amazing degree, which turns out to be very useful.
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:03 EST