Subject: Re: Notation in EA - comments?
From: Louis Dufort (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Feb 01 1999 - 07:37:18 EST
> 1. For recorded works (with no live performance or composer-directed
> active projection), what functions does a 'score' actually serve for
> listener and composer?
I would say mostly for analysis.
> 2. 'Scores' may be created before- or after-the fact (or some
> combination) for works that do not include live performances. This is
> certainly related to how much the composer works through the materials as
> opposed to working towards a solidly defined plan. What value judgements
> are placed on the two approaches to both notating and composing?
In ea music create a score in priority to the sound may be quite
even useful. But a experienced composer can surely make an overall
plan of his pièce. But the important issue to remember here is that
doing a score before the work is not a more elaborated or superior way
of composing eam. Since an ea composer is in direct contact with his
material, the biggest part of the composition is happening on the spot.
The ea composer
make choices within is material source than he can manipulate until he
he wants. Those manipulations are very complexe because we deal with a
large range of timbers throughout complexe treatement.
The composer can start composing once he have heard the quality of the
Doing the opposite of that is not a ea approach but an instrumental
> 3. Given that some EA composers work almost entirely in software
> environments that generate copious amounts of visual material as the work
> progresses, how valid would it be to consider this material an after-the
> fact 'score'?
1. the piece time line and amplitude, useful for the segmentation of the
(sound designer, pro-tools)
2. A sonogram, useful for the pitch and the amplitude of a given
But still, I would say a score (drawing) made by the composer is the
effective way to have a global picture of the piece.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:08:50 EDT