Re: Intuitive EA Proformance Practice Research


Subject: Re: Intuitive EA Proformance Practice Research
From: Rick (ricknance@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Oct 13 2005 - 18:30:58 EDT


On 10/13/05, Richard Wentk <richard@skydancer.com> wrote:
> At 18:33 13/10/2005, you wrote:

> I don't think this is true because there examples that contradict it - e.g.
> a guitar synthesizer [...]no one seems to mind
> that there's no longer a relationship between physical string pitch and
> performed pitch, or that the sound that's being made is nothing like a
> guitar and doesn't respond in the same kind of way.
>

Oh yeah, that was it.

There Is a relationship between physical string pitch and performed
pitch. The feedback loop is continuous. Yes there are long-learned
perfomance techniques, but that's not (primarily) what we're talking
about now.

Once the parameters have been set up for, let's say, a guitart
controller (we won't talk about MIDI because it's 8bit and there's no
point anymore, its just an mass production artifact) but a controller
with some decent voltage control outputs and good AD conversion. The
string is still directly tied to the signal (unless it's been decided
to program the controlled device to do otherwise) The ears are tied to
the sound and to the hands.

> At that point you're no longer
> playing the violin in a physical sense, you're playing the sound with
> pedals and other modifiers that offer little or no tactile feedback at all.

Not true.The modifiers may alter the signal, but they do it in a
relatively direct way (if for no other reasn, than maybe to keep the
lagtime to 0), In a sense no more different than differently shaped
body or a different material string/body/plectra alters the sound of a
guitar. When youplay an electric guitar, you sometimes hear it refered
to as a "rig". You often play the physical EA space between the amp
and guitar when trying to control feedback and overdrive/distortion,
but you're still entirely immersed in the ear/body/sound/instrument
feedback system.

There's still that piano thing, but it's a percussion device really.
And it seems to me tht there's still a very direct physical
relationship to the sounds' outcome. Yes, it lacks forced feedback. so
that's a deadend for the rest of my argument. But i'm still right and
everyone else is wrong. I would add some sort of smileyface thingy
here, but there have been complaints lodged and I'm not sure of the
ironic smile.

R

Pianos only really have velocity as an articulation feature, but to
> make up for it the sound is unusally rich and complex.
>
> In fact there seems to be a trade-off in instrument design where simpler
> sounding instruments tend to be built with more articulation, and those
> with more complex timbres offer less.
>
> Richard
>
>
>

--
======================
Rick Nance
De Montfort University
Leicester, UK
RickNance.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:13 EST