[Csnd] [OT] Analog Reinterpretation of Realtime Csound Piece
| Date | 2024-04-25 00:22 | |
| From | Arthur Hunkins <000001e1d761dea2-dmarc-request@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE> | |
| Subject | [Csnd] [OT] Analog Reinterpretation of Realtime Csound Piece | |
|
I've just finished a reinterpretation, for Behringer 2600 synthesizer, of a demo live-performance improvisation I did for my previous (and most recent) Csound piece/instrument,
Imago Dei.
The new piece is entitled Imago Dei 2. Both pieces and realizations are at the top of the composition list at my website,
www.arthunkins.com.
In this latest (nostalgic?) endeavor, I harken back decades to the UNCG Electronic Studio, where one of my primary teaching instruments was an ARP 2600 (for which I composed several pieces (last century!)
FWIW I've found it much more difficult to go from digital back to analog than the other way around. Duplicating, in any real sense, what's possible with (the riches of) digital - e.g., Csound, is near impossible with traditional synths - even in my relatively
minimalistic style.
The Behringer 2600 result here is indeed a far cry from what it attempts to "recapture". (It's probably not entirely worthwhile to even try.) I'll do more work with the Behringer, but let it fly on its own to a much greater degree from here on.
Art H.
abhunkin@uncg.edu
http://www.arthunkins.com
|
| Date | 2024-04-25 06:54 | |
| From | vlz | |
| Subject | Re: [Csnd] [OT] Analog Reinterpretation of Realtime Csound Piece | |
| That's a really interesting approach. I find the 2600 a great instrument, but using it is very different from using Csound. Prof. Victor Lazzarini Maynooth University Ireland On 25 Apr 2024, at 00:22, Arthur Hunkins <000001e1d761dea2-dmarc-request@listserv.heanet.ie> wrote:
|
| Date | 2024-04-25 17:49 | |
| From | Michael Gogins | |
| Subject | Re: [Csnd] [OT] Analog Reinterpretation of Realtime Csound Piece | |
I like the 2600 realization better. It has a different timbre, less harsh to my ears. There is also a kind of high-end airiness that I associate with analog circuit nonlinearities, for example, a digital click is just a click, whereas an analog click sounds almost like hitting a piece of dry wood -- digital "tick" versus analog "tonk." It should definitely be possible to emulate this analog sound, perhaps one could start with an appropriate impulse response. I'm not an expert here but I know that DSP experts do things like this to emulate analog circuitry. Best, Mike ----------------------------------------------------- Michael GoginsIrreducible Productions http://michaelgogins.tumblr.com Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 2:05 AM vlz <viclazzarini@gmail.com> wrote:
|
| Date | 2024-04-25 19:36 | |
| From | Arthur Hunkins <000001e1d761dea2-dmarc-request@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE> | |
| Subject | Re: [Csnd] [OT] Analog Reinterpretation of Realtime Csound Piece | |
|
@Victor -
Agreed; the 2600 presents a much narrower pallet.
But as Igor Stravinsky claimed, a well-circumscribed pallet can be very positive, leading to thorough and systematic exploration. (He clearly delimited his territory as a matter of course.)
abhunkin@uncg.edu
http://www.arthunkins.com
From: A discussion list for users of Csound <CSOUND@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE> on behalf of vlz <viclazzarini@GMAIL.COM>
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2024 1:54 AM To: CSOUND@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE <CSOUND@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE> Subject: Re: [Csnd] [OT] Analog Reinterpretation of Realtime Csound Piece That's a really interesting approach. I find the 2600 a great instrument, but using it is very different from
using Csound.
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to
https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Prof. Victor Lazzarini
Maynooth University
Ireland
On 25 Apr 2024, at 00:22, Arthur Hunkins <000001e1d761dea2-dmarc-request@listserv.heanet.ie> wrote:
|
| Date | 2024-04-25 19:48 | |
| From | Arthur Hunkins <000001e1d761dea2-dmarc-request@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE> | |
| Subject | Re: [Csnd] [OT] Analog Reinterpretation of Realtime Csound Piece | |
|
Michael -
Thanks for your comment.
Here, analog and digital are, from the timbral standpoint, quite different animals indeed. (I was surprised how very different they turned out.) As I think you'd agree, it is far more difficult to emulate digital in analog (as I was attempting), than to emulate
analog digitally - though I'm sure the latter is no "piece of cake" either (as you suggest).
abhunkin@uncg.edu
http://www.arthunkins.com
From: A discussion list for users of Csound <CSOUND@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE> on behalf of Michael Gogins <michael.gogins@GMAIL.COM>
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2024 12:49 PM To: CSOUND@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE <CSOUND@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE> Subject: Re: [Csnd] [OT] Analog Reinterpretation of Realtime Csound Piece I like the 2600 realization better. It has a different timbre, less harsh to my ears. There is also a kind of high-end airiness that I associate with analog circuit nonlinearities, for example, a digital click
is just a click, whereas an analog click sounds almost like hitting a piece of dry wood -- digital "tick" versus analog "tonk."
It should definitely be possible to emulate this analog sound, perhaps one could start with an appropriate impulse response. I'm not an expert here but I know that DSP experts do things like this to emulate analog circuitry.
Best,
Mike
-----------------------------------------------------
Michael Gogins
Irreducible Productions http://michaelgogins.tumblr.com Michael dot Gogins at gmail dot com On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 2:05 AM vlz <viclazzarini@gmail.com> wrote:
Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here |