| these are interesting comments. However, I dont agree at all with this
idea of
what music is or isnt.... melody? rhythms? performer? instruments? there
are some of us who dont think about music in these musical(for lack of a
better word) terms and
dont want to either. I guess its just personal opinion.
Personaly I look
at my "Musical" training as a complete waste of time, money and energy. I
find working in the electroacoustic world more satisfying then my work in
"Note" music. I dont think one can compare Mozart style music to Jonty
Harrison style music and say one is better or is ear candy. Its up to the
listener to make the choice of what they like or dont like. I find that
writing music that is idiomatic of the instrument is most important and
Jonty Harrison is one of those composers that does it very, very well. I
could name other composers who work in this style who are good as well. I
tend
to think of the computer as an instrument like the piano for some poeple.
I do tape music and love the freedom of expression that this form of music
gives me as a composer. this freedom is not only in the unfolding of time
but also the
abitiy to create my own "instruments" that are not dependent on
traditional performance limitations or timbre and most of all limited by
the use of a live performer(not that I dont like live perfomrers but they
are hard to find around here). I guess I kind of resent the "Traditional"
compositional training I have been forced to endure in the University by
being forced to write "Real Music"(I had no idea that music could not be
real until a lesson in my last year at undergrad university) that I have
no interest in. This is really off the subject at hand and has nothing
to do with csound but, In my opinion Tape
music in the U.S.A. and elsewhere is generaly discriminated against and
music including
visual or "eye candy"(to play the other side of the coin) put as a higher
priority purly due to the use of a live person or visual aspect and not
because its a better piece.. This is also evident in international and
national live events by
comparing the equality
of the
performance spaces(including equipment) to that of the "eye candy"
concerts (again, Im just playing the other side of the ear candy idea).
I feel that there
needs to be a happy medium of all types of compostions
using the computer and personal opinion put aside for the good of the art
form.
Ok, is there a IRIX 6.3 binary of Csound3.47? I cant seem to find one.
Michael
On Tue, 10 Feb
1998, Michael Pelz-Sherman wrote:
> Oh what the hey, I'll jump in on this one...
>
> I think there is an important distinction to be made between music and "ear candy". The latter might
> bring "instant gratification", but in the long run, one grows tired of the empty calories and
> longs for something that "sticks to the ribs". For my money, there's no substitute for a great melody
> line, played with feeling, or intricate, complex rhythms that dance on the edge of notateability.
> Striking that perfect balance between change and continuity, the proper relationship between
> time and materials, etc. Coaxing these out of a machine is damn hard work, and computational methods are
> severely handicapped in this area.
>
> Tools like CSound offer so much signal processing power that one is tempted to focus on timbre to the
> exclusion of all else. The problem with CSound, and with most electronic music, is that it lacks
> the dynamic interaction between composer, performer, instrument, and audience that gives traditional music
> its expressive power. IMO, the really hard, truly interesting problems of computer music are not in
> how to produce beautiful sounds, but how to imbue the computer with the musical "common sense" that
> made the careers of Mozart, Beethoven and Stravinsky possible.
>
> - mps
>
|