Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Related: Another approach. Given the invincible latency on the net I think that Virtual E- jamming is as good, or even in some ways a better way of collaborating. It works as this: Musician A records something while visualizing musician B jamming along. In his playing A needs to respond to his vision of B, even though B isn't there. Then A sends this recording with snail mail to B. Musician B listens, not so much to the actual sound recorded as to the sound NOT recorded - the stuff left out by A. Then B records his response to A's recording and "the stuff left out" (i.e. A's vision of his absent jamming partner responding). I've tried this and it works marvelously! It may even be easier than jamming in the same time, because B's response doesn't have to be the same as A originally envisioned B to do. If B later comes up with playing something differently it is probable that A's mimicked, recorded, response to that will still be musically fitting. For group improvisation I have always been interested in playing "compositions" that do not deal with traditional ways of describing music, as in "notes", "chords" etc. You could in fact write a tune where you use different kinds of vegetables, or whatever, as "notes" are used in a normal charts. Anyway, the fascinating thing here is that interesting music comes out of it as long as everyone involved truly tries to musically interpret whatever he is given. And of course as long as the relations and movements of the symbols used has some sort of meaning. It's not the symbols themselves but the relations between used symbols that makes music when interpreted by humans. I think the instincts at work here are the answer to why Virtual E-jamming actually works so well. Greetings from Sweden Per Boysen www.boysen.se (Swedish) www.looproom.com (international) http://tinyurl.com/2kek7h (latest music release) On 1 feb 2007, at 00.47, Daryl Shawn wrote: > Speaking as a very frequent Ninjam user, this is certainly > interesting but I'm somewhat skeptical of the article/marketing. > They put down Ninjam for its delay, yet this app also adds a delay. > And it says peer-to-peer, yet you need to buy a ($15/month) > subscription, so you're not avoiding their servers altogether. I > think Ninjam, with no need for cash to change hands and open source > code, has a more promising life (Os, for example, created a plug-in > on his own from the code making it much more useful for laptop peeps). > > I myself love this: > > *"In Sync. In Real Time.* Or in as close to real time as the laws > of physics allow." > > those pesky laws of physics... > > Daryl Shawn > www.swanwelder.com > >> wired story:<http://www.wired.com/news/technology/software/ >> 0,72612-0.html?tw=rss.technology> >> site:<http://www.ejamming.com/> >