Re: aleatory analogue in the house

[Mark Sottilaro <sine@zerocrossing.net>]

On Tuesday, July 15, 2003, at 06:23 AM, goddard.duncan@mtvne.com wrote:

> so my measured response is this: it's not about analogue vs digital, 
> it's about how much encouragement and opportunity there is to go y'r 
> own way sonically. and of course, it's also a lot easier if there are 
> library sounds for a hopelessly inept synthesiser player to pretend 
> they're a synthesist.

OK, I see your point.  However, I think you misjudge some of the modern 
equipment.  On it's surface it seems all instant gratification but if 
you dig to the next layer there can be a wealth of tweaking at your 
fingertips.  The Roland MC-307 had a step sequencer that let you change 
up your beat on the fly, and when I replaced it with an E-MU XL-7 I 
upped the ability to tweak on the fly 10X.  Anyway, I'm all about the 
good old days, but there are amazing tools still being put out today.

> instant gratification is important to tech manufacturers because it 
> assists in the commoditisation of music and this generates more 
> business for them; that's why the market is awash with boxes that have 
> presets and librarys easily available. meanwhile, the stuff that 
> actually requires creative input from a sonic sculptor working from 
> scratch to create something original, costs as much as a house.

I'm not sure I agree about the whole instant gratification thing.  I 
think that our culture has too deep of a division between musician and 
everyone else.  Too many teachers begin giving students dry drills.  
Turns them off to music forever... or at least to the idea of being a 
musician.  A box that's got some instant fun involved can spark a fun 
aspect and get a student to move forward.  Many, of course, will 
realize it's not for them and drop it, but I think it's not necessarily 
a bad thing all the time.

Mark Sottilaro