Subject: Re: observances
From: jan.larsson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Jul 17 1999 - 22:22:10 EDT
At 16.51 +0200 99-07-17, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
>Most of the jury statement, however, is nonsense. Gee, I can identify the
>software used to produce that; might as well say I know a clarinet is
>playing that tune. Saying the software is manipulating the user is akin to
>believing the limits of a clarinet manipulate the composer?
i think there is a lot of truth behind that statement. there is a big
difference between the normal instrumentalist and the normal software
user. usually the clarinet player knows his instrument very well and
know how to use it in an expressive/creative way.
but how many learn any software that well? or even a synthesiser? can you
really say you have not heard any eam pieces where the software is
controlling the composer?
in my view eam has to start going somewhere again, most pieces seem
to be primarily composed for analysis rather than listening.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Wed Jun 11 2003 - 13:09:02 EDT