Re: looping and the public and categorization

[andy butler <akbutler@tiscali.co.uk>]

Rainer Straschill wrote:
> Andy added the following to that huge brand name discussion:
>> What the public doesn't know is that looping technology can be used
>> to create music such as has not been heard before, that it's
>> possible to "take it to the next level", to quote an appreciative
>> audience member.
> Why would the public want to know? Why would they care?

...but I just quoted a member of the public who cared and wanted
to know...like...er...just there before your comment :-)


> This goes in line with my theory about audiences perceiving music 
> (unless they are either dedicated or nerdy musicians or musicologists on 
> a mission): The audience does not care how exactly it's made. They only 
> care how it sounds and in the case of live performance/videos how it 
>looks.
> (this theory needn't be true, it's merely based on a relatively small 
> sample, but here's some related thesis: http://fwd4.me/0fD)

(note, link goes to blog referring to *improvised* music)

maybe times are changing,
but traditionally the music buying public hasn't had
any difficulty in distinguishing between "live album", and 
"studio album"...or any reluctance to to be critical of
live acts who use canned backing.

If the public isn't interested in hearing something new,
then it doesn't hurt to tell them anything at all about
your new music.
If they're interested in something new, I suspect they
feel comfortable that it has some kind of explanation/description.


> 
>> Since the introduction of the Roland machines, which are hardly
>> designed as a spring board for the imagination, the world
>>
> ...with the exception of the DD20 ;)

Aren't most of the thrills obtained  by using it in a way the
designers never intended? 


andy butler


> 
>