[Csnd] new work 'Vertex'
Date | 2012-12-03 15:34 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Here is a silly stereo reduction of my recent 6 channel work 'Vertex'. The mp3 quality and stereo reduction are nasty but it should give an idea of the sound-world. Other than the mixing it is 99% Csound.
Best, Peiman
|
Date | 2012-12-03 16:00 |
From | Richard Dobson |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
On 03/12/2012 15:34, peiman khosravi wrote: > Here is a silly stereo reduction of my recent 6 channel work 'Vertex'. > The mp3 quality and stereo reduction are nasty but it should give an > idea of the sound-world. Other than the mixing it is 99% Csound. > Oh now, I think that that means that there is still 1% which is neither Csound nor mixing. Or, that the mixing is Csound but specifically not 99% of it. I think we need to know.:-) It needs deep listening, which I will have to defer to later on. Funny though how, once one knows the original is in surround, one hears every sound and understands how, of course, it needs those extra speakers...whereas not knowing that, I would guess that one would not think the stereo "nasty" at all! Richard Dobson |
Date | 2012-12-03 16:07 |
From | Steven Yi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Hi Peiman, Listening to it now: very, very nice piece! I'd love to know more about the technical details of the piece if you're willing to discuss it. (Sounds used/synthesized, how you mixed down to stereo, etc.) Otherwise, love the pulsing rhythms, the delicacy, the sounds. I wish I could hear the 6-channel version now... :) Thanks very much for sharing! steven On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 3:34 PM, peiman khosravi |
Date | 2012-12-03 16:17 |
From | Dave Phillips |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
On 12/03/12 11:00, Richard Dobson wrote: > ... > ... once one knows the original is in surround, one hears every sound > and understands how, of course, it needs those extra > speakers...whereas not knowing that, I would guess that one would not > think the stereo "nasty" at all! Definitely not nasty here, but I agree, the sounds want more dispersion than stereo offers. Once again, excellent work, Peiman. I'd love to hear it in multiple channels. Best, dp |
Date | 2012-12-03 16:31 |
From | Rory Walsh |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Looking forward to listening. I get to leave work in 27 minutes... On 3 December 2012 16:17, Dave Phillips |
Date | 2012-12-03 16:44 |
From | Nicolas Drweski |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Good work Peiman, definitly good control of frequencies, which is the key to understand space obviously, although (is it a proper use of that word?) beiing in stereo or surround doesn't make much diference to me, in general. I would say that surround sound, however (? is it a good use of the word...) you use it, doesn't seems to be perceved as a change of nature. i would translate the comparaison between stereo and surround in the orchestration field ( which work on spaciality could be compared too ), as the diference between Bartok, Debussy or stravinsky and webern, which is not perceived by the ears as a change of nature in orchestration. The change of nature would be the diference between, webern or so and let's say one among others François Bayle. Like Richard said I can "easely" imagine it in surround. The technology ( or the knowledge or understanding of space) is not nowadays enough to provoque a change of nature coming from it's spatial aspect, like recorded sounds was in electroacoustic music, but Peiman, you definitly contribute to make the music progress in that domain. If you permit me, I would suggest that you economize the spaces you are creating so that each time it happens it will be an unique moment. Creating contrast between moment spacially precise, and moment les precise so that there contrast of spaces. p.s Have you had the oportunity to listen to a Wfs system ? Nicolas Le 3 déc. 2012 à 17:00, Richard Dobson |
Date | 2012-12-03 17:28 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
On 3 December 2012 16:00, Richard Dobson <richarddobson@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
Haha! OK, here is more detail. It was mixed exclusively in Protools. all of the material is synthesised with Csound, only pvs opcodes, for and partikkel. That one percent is just there for safety in case I have forgotten something! Possibly a little bit of audio sculpt here and there. A bit of EQ, gating and transposition in protools. And a couple of sounds were processed with a 'decorrelator' that Andres Cabrera has made for his PhD thesis, but that is not relevant to the stereo mix.
I wouldn't spend too much time on it since I think, even though it is not immediately audible, the multichannel version includes elements that are missing here. Each grain and each spectral element is 'positioned' differently and there is a lot of spatial counterpoint, motion, and shifts in vantage point that one can only image in the stereo mix down. More importantly there is a sense of contiguous overhead canopy in the 6 channel version (to which the title refers) which cannot be reproduced in simple stereo playback.
All the best, Peiman
|
Date | 2012-12-03 17:32 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Hi Steven, Thanks very much! As I mentioned to my reply to Richard (above), the synthesis was done either with fof or particle. The processing was done entirely (as far as I remember) in FFTools.
I will be happy to answer any questions. And if you have access to a multichannel studio I'd be happy to send you a copy. all the best, Peiman
On 3 December 2012 16:07, Steven Yi <stevenyi@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Peiman, |
Date | 2012-12-03 17:39 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Hi Nicolas, Thanks for the comments. I think multichannel audio offers new possibilities that are beyond stereo composition. And I think that we have only just begun to explore these possibilities. Once we deal with the novelty of 'joysticking' sounds around the audience, we start to deal with spatiality in a more mature and imaginative way. Working with multichannel audio requires one to think in a different way and hard-code the spatial element in the sounds form the start, rather than just as a kind of fixed diffusion.
to me this stereo mix only provides 50% of the actual experience of the work (maybe less, but these things are so subjective anyway). Having said that, I'm glad that you don't think the piece is completely lost with the stereo mix down!
I would love to try Wfs but have never had a chance. Best, Peiman On 3 December 2012 16:44, Nicolas Drweski <ndrweski@yahoo.fr> wrote: Good work Peiman, definitly good control of frequencies, which is the key to understand space obviously, although (is it a proper use of that word?) beiing in stereo or surround doesn't make much diference to me, in general. I would say that surround sound, however (? is it a good use of the word...) you use it, doesn't seems to be perceved as a change of nature. i would translate the comparaison between stereo and surround in the orchestration field ( which work on spaciality could be compared too ), as the diference between Bartok, Debussy or stravinsky and webern, which is not perceived by the ears as a change of nature in orchestration. The change of nature would be the diference between, webern or so and let's say one among others François Bayle. |
Date | 2012-12-03 17:40 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Steven, I should say that the stereo mix down is just that, nothing fancy. Just mixing all the stereo pairs into two channels and normalising the output! P
On 3 December 2012 16:07, Steven Yi <stevenyi@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Peiman, |
Date | 2012-12-03 17:41 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Thank you very much Dave! Yes, dispersion! Again, if you do have a system I'll be happy to send you the original version. All the best, Peiman
On 3 December 2012 16:17, Dave Phillips <dlphillips@woh.rr.com> wrote: On 12/03/12 11:00, Richard Dobson wrote: |
Date | 2012-12-03 17:48 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
For example, what appears to be texturally dense in stereo, may not be that saturated in surround where different textural elements can be positions differently, in such a way that they don't impinge on each other's space (even if they overlap spectrally). You can carefully design different spatial zones and textures that are just not possible in stereo. In relation to this piece, for instance, the pulse section is perceived completely differently because of the way in which the different layers and pulses are spatial articulated.
all the best,
Peiman On 3 December 2012 17:39, peiman khosravi <peimankhosravi@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Nicolas, |
Date | 2012-12-03 17:52 |
From | Nicolas Drweski |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
I wish that to but i've only listened to. Those kind of dispositive are "reserved" due to the prixe of it, and the cpu required... Well, on the other topic, if weconsider that Webern offers new possibilities to the orchestration since beethoven, than surround do to... but if we consider that the orchestration of webern doesn't bring a change in nature, than it is not that much different from the one of beethoven, then i wouldn't say that suround sound offer new possibilities. I would say that we almost didn't begin to work on space due to knowledge maters and tecnologies. 50% it would be 50% of another 100% ! keep your work in that direction ! Le 3 déc. 2012 à 18:39, peiman khosravi <peimankhosravi@gmail.com> a écrit :
|
Date | 2012-12-03 17:55 |
From | Nicolas Drweski |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
I agree with everything you say ( putting in comparaison piece i have done in surround and reducted in stereo) but the change that spaciality can (could) bring in nature is not yet discovered. Le 3 déc. 2012 à 18:48, peiman khosravi <peimankhosravi@gmail.com> a écrit :
|
Date | 2012-12-03 17:59 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
I was going to say the following: But instead I'm going to say, that depends on what you mean by 'nature'. P
On 3 December 2012 17:52, Nicolas Drweski <ndrweski@yahoo.fr> wrote:
|
Date | 2012-12-03 18:01 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
What do you mean by nature? Listening to a midi version of a Beethoven symphony does change the nature of the work. On 3 December 2012 17:55, Nicolas Drweski <ndrweski@yahoo.fr> wrote:
|
Date | 2012-12-03 18:25 |
From | Nicolas Drweski |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
we had exactly the same example in mind : the orchestration of bach work. But it doesn't bring a change in the sense that no matter how you orchestrate it will have the same result, just bring another color. on the other hand, Xenakis and Grisey have brang a change of nature, probably influenced by their work on electroaoustic. I think that probably we don't have the same definition of "by nature". by this i mean that basiclly, it is possible to downmix a work in surround to stereo. You'll loose, but the structure will be conserved. in that sense the surround doesn't bring a change in nature. on the other hand you cannot arrange a xenakis or grisey orchestral work for piano let's say, because the orchestra have element that cannot be reducted for the piano (glissandis, quater tones, various dynamics at the same time) If you do, you miss the structure of the original piece. Hope i am clear... Peiman, I hope you don't take it as a critic, because it is not, i was talking about the point were we all (composer that have a particular attention on space) are at this point that cannot permit us to fully take advantage artisticlly of spatiallity, but that it is certainly one aspect to be considered in the future. Hope to not be misunderstood. Le 3 déc. 2012 à 18:59, peiman khosravi <peimankhosravi@gmail.com> a écrit :
|
Date | 2012-12-03 18:40 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Hi Nicolas, Sure the form of the piece remain more or less intact, although this is open to debate in that some formal articulation may be lost. But music is about the whole experience rather than the 'nature' or essence of a work. That's too metaphysical for me! Just because the work remains recognisable and its form (say, sonata) remains intact it doesn't mean that the meaningful experience of the work remains the same. In orchestrating piano works Ravel doesn't simply add colour.
Of course I don't take it personally, and I have no problems with criticism anyway and welcome it. But I'm not defending my work here, which is far less than perfect or exhaustive. I am just saying that perspectival configurations in a multichannel piece can be essential to musical form. I've heard many examples, even if I haven't managed to achieve it myself.
P On 3 December 2012 18:25, Nicolas Drweski <ndrweski@yahoo.fr> wrote:
|
Date | 2012-12-04 08:25 |
From | Oeyvind Brandtsegg |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Peiman, Thanks so much for the piece. It was indeed interesting to hear the stereo reduction, and compare to the multichannel version. I experience the music of it completely different. It appears to me you are a master of spatial composition and you have a strong point when you claim that the spatial characteristics should be composed as part of the sound from the start, not added as coloration (freely rephrased). The density is obviously different in stereo than in multichannel, as there is simply less space to hold the same elements, but in my opinion something happens to the manner time passes too. I don't have a clear theory about this, but it is something I experience quite clearly. Thanks again, both for the nice music, and for an interesting study. best Oeyvind 2012/12/3 peiman khosravi <peimankhosravi@gmail.com> Hi Nicolas, -- Oeyvind Brandtsegg Professor of Music Technology NTNU 7491 Trondheim Norway Cell: +47 92 203 205 http://flyndresang.no/ http://www.partikkelaudio.com/ http://soundcloud.com/brandtsegg http://soundcloud.com/t-emp |
Date | 2012-12-04 09:17 |
From | peiman khosravi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Hi Oeyvind, Thanks very much indeed for listening again and for the comments. For me this is very very interesting to hear. And your comment about the passing of time is something I have not thought about but now I think I should! Very interesting.
All the best, Peiman
On 4 December 2012 08:25, Oeyvind Brandtsegg <oyvind.brandtsegg@ntnu.no> wrote: Peiman, |
Date | 2012-12-04 11:36 |
From | Rory Walsh |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
I look forward to hearing it in its full glory at some stage. I'd say it's quite a cinematic experience. Really fires up the imagination. On 4 December 2012 09:17, peiman khosravi |
Date | 2012-12-04 11:46 |
From | Steven Yi |
Subject | Re: [Csnd] new work 'Vertex' |
Hi Peiman, Thanks for discussing the work in all the emails in this thread. Enjoyed this very much! steven On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 5:40 PM, peiman khosravi |