-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 12:05:33AM -1000, david wrote:
Ken Restivo wrote:
I continue to be amazed by the lengths that we-all
electronic
musicians go thorugh, in terms of painstaking sequencing and editing,
or long hours of programming and algorithm tweaking, in order to
approximate the things that a well-rehearsed band does when
performing in real time.
That's because digital control interfaces aren't as rich as analog
control interfaces. Compare the expressiveness of a good violinist
playing a real violin vs a synthesized violin played through a MIDI
keyboard.
I was thinking in regard to the number of variations over time, not the degree of
expressiveness of each variation.
For example, even a band consisting wholly of keyboard players, a MIDI EWI player, and a
drummer playing trigger pads (yes, I have been in one), will nonetheless introduce the
kind of random variation and dynamics that would otherwise require many hours of
painstaking editing and/or codiing to emulate in a sequencer.
Human players, regardless of how expressive or inexpressive their instrument, periodically
get bored and/or make mistakes, thus introducing enough intentional or unintentioal
variation to keep the music from getting too monotonous.
A sequencer or looper will just play the same thing over and over again, exactly the same,
if you let it. It takes a lot of work to prevent it from doing that.
I'm always impressed by electronic music like Chris's (and Thorsten's-- I love
"The Sample") which offers as much "information content" (using
Shannon's definition) as that produced by a group of live musicians interacting with
each other in real-time. That's why I was so eager to find out how he did it.
- -ken
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGzl8be8HF+6xeOIcRAhm5AKDmUctGOeutJz0Pt/cn0FOlHOFp1wCeJFdp
Ya/it7CMty8dH9SWgTeAnO8=
=9JTv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----