RE: looping as sin

[Kim Flint <kflint@chromatic.com>]

At 02:41 PM 2/6/98 -0600, Liebig, Steuart A. wrote:
>       IF someone is noodling with a guitar (or any instrument) without
>processing, it can be just as annoying (or more so) than any IC chip.
>But I have to go back to situations that I've been in where people were
>so hung up on their processors that they couldn't react to a group
>improv situation. As far as my experience goes, the micro-processors in
>these machines can't react as quickly as I can to someone else's
>playing, particulary where change of tonality is concerned. I guess I'm
>bugged when I feel that people are abdicating their musical flexibilty
>or decision-making to whatever tool it is that they use.

So it seems you are bothered by the people and not so much the tools they 
use?



>       Lastly, with all this talk of the human/instrument interface
>also being a "limitation" . . . my question is this: What is more
>capable of nuanced performance people or machines? For example, the old
>tech of Violins, etc. has been developed for many thousands of years,
>try to get a MIDI instrument to be as nuanced both from the hardware
>side and the performance practice side. I don't expect machines to
>perform as well as people, I use 'em and think that they're great tools,
>but I understand what I consider to be their limitations and uses. 

I always find it remarkable when people perceive the newer, electronic
devices as "technology" in preference to older things. I think the piano is
one of the most stunning technological accomplishments humans have ever
made. The amount of knowledge and invention that had to happen before the
modern piano could exist is simply amazing. That to me is one of the finest
examples of technology I can think of. Just because it's been basically
finished for a hundred years doesn't lessen the technical accomplishment.

Now, ICs are no slouch in the technology department either, but knowing 
what
goes into them, I just don't see it as so amazing. It always strikes me as
odd when people express an emotionally driven bias against the bits of
technology that happened recently, but are accepting of what happened 
before
some arbitrary date. It's luddite hypocrisy. (hmm, I should send that to 
Ted
Kaczinski...)

As you noted, some instruments have been in development for hundreds or 
even
thousands of years. A LOT of people spent their entire lives on these,
passing it on to generations of developers and inventors who spent their
entire lives. Electronic instruments have a few decades on them, with most
of the work happening in the last two. Maybe the refinements are still 
going
on and have a ways to go? Really, I don't see any point in getting bent
about that. It's like hating a four year old for not have the maturity and
wisdom of his grandfather. Give it time, they'll get there.

and there are certainly a lot of people making expressive, nuanced music
with existing electronic instruments. Perhaps you just forced these
instruments into an inappropriate context, and expected what they weren't
really capable of? It seems like you developed your entire bias from 
playing
in a group improv situation with somebody using a midi controller! And let
me guess, was it that least developed of all midi devices, the guitar 
synth?
A bit circumstantial, isn't it?  

The people who create remarkable music with electronic instruments use them
for what the can do, and place that in service of their music. And a lot of
what electronics can do isn't possible any other way, so for a lot of 
people
it opens possiblities they could not have had otherwise. Some of them do
pretty good stuff.

And some people just play with the knobs and make goofy noises and never do
anything remarkable other than enjoy themselves. You can't really fault 
them
or the electronics for that, can you?

kim
________________________________________________________
Kim Flint                      408-752-9284
Mpact System Engineering       kflint@chromatic.com
Chromatic Research             http://www.chromatic.com