Re: discouraged

Date	1998-02-09 14:29
From	Richard Dobson
Subject	Re: discouraged
	It's funny how so often musicians need to use metaphors or imagery form the visual arts and visual language to describe musical phenomena. The more I explore this, the more extraordinary I find it - our language is desperately short of purely musical constructs. This, I feeel, is a cultural phenomenon. Artists have so often sought to defend their work by reference to some 'absolute', almost Platonic, criterion of quality (structure, symmetry, balance, argument, etc )- none of which says anything concrete about the experience of sound in time. These terms have been lifted from architecture, geometry, rhetoric - the great Classical disciplines. Classical composers and performers have had the advantage (depending on how skillful they are!) of a long and arduously established (and ~culturally determined, despite the waffle about 'pure' , 'absolute' or 'universal' musical discourse) tradition of 'good practice', and it seems that right through to the nineteenth century, the highest praise one could give to a musician was to say they had 'good taste'. The problem for us is the relative absence of this canon of good practice, other than by common consent - that very same 'good taste'. And on what is that common consent based ? We can refer to 'classical' good practice, any amount of conceptual calculation and ingenuity, endless comparisons with other art forms, but in the end, I suspect it does indeed come down to something almost vernacular - is it 'interesting and entertaining'? If we reflect on the proper non-perjorative meanings of these words, they do say quite a lot! My favourite definition of music is from John Beaulieu ('Music and the Healing Arts') - "music is the appreciation of sound". This is more than just saying 'beauty is in the eye of the beholder', because 'appreciation' carries with it a host of implicits, concerning knowledge, discrimination, culture, and so on. So we make sounds, and collections, sequences of sounds, which we, and hopefully others, may appreciate. The amazing thing about computer music is that we are not just making the sounds, but making the appreciation too! And, thank goodness, it is still too soon to close the book on either. Richard Dobson bruce quaglia wrote: > On Mon, 9 Feb 1998, rasmus ekman wrote: > > > Then it's just a matter of cramming them together in an > > interesting and entertaining shape... but with such first-class > > material the sounds almost laid themselves side by side right away. > > > > I don't want to appear to be picking a fight....but, > there's something aesthetically bankrupt in the notion > that the compostional aspects of writing a good piece > of electro-acoustic music amount to nothing more > than coming up with good sounds and then "cramming > them together in an interesting and entertaining shape"... > In fact, I would say that this notion accounts for more > truly bad pieces of electro-acoustic music than I can > count. A new sound, a new technology or a new midi > controller is not in an of itself enough to make a > piece of music anymore than a Beethoven sonata is > some "some good chords" or tunes crammed together. > A painter mixes his/her pallette...AND THEN THEY PAINT! > Anyone with me on this? (again, pardon the pugilistic > tone, I'm sure you didn't mean that remark litterally, > (I hope), but it's a real issue...honest to God it is..) > > Bruce Quaglia > bruce.quaglia@m.cc.utah.edu

Date	1998-02-11 04:37
From	mbpcpa@sprynet.com
Subject	Re: discouraged
	So I let that quote "Music is the appreciation of sound" percolate in the back of my brain for a while. It sounded so nice, so pretty, so accepting. But eventually it bothered me for this reason: it confuses the object "music" with the implicit subjects that "receive" the music. I appreciate the sound of waves drawing up and sliding down the shingle. I appreciate the sound of a well-tuned motorcycle engine purring like a big fat cat. But there is no music in "the appreciation" of these sounds. Music is the "stuff", not the "appreciation of stuff". And it's artificial, human-concocted stuff. It's a bag of tricks, not the appreciation of a bag of tricks. It's very hard to talk about music without giving most people the old feeling that "we murder to dissect". Elvis Costello was quoted saying something like "talking about music is like dancing about architecture". It can be done, but most people don't have the patience to learn the technical lingo. Why should they? Let the academics spin the elegantly structured ideas and analyses. I just want to write some decent music - and I think you know what I mean.

Date	1998-02-11 13:14
From	J.Craine-ie3i7529@lmu.ac.uk
Subject	Re: discouraged
	On the point of a well tuned motocycle engine purring like a big fat cat. Isnt there some sort of rhythm and some sort of continous tone in this sound if you listen carefully enough, and so is that not music? Just a thought jamie On Tue, 10 Feb 1998 mbpcpa@sprynet.com wrote: > So I let that quote "Music is the appreciation of sound" percolate in the back > of my brain for a while. It sounded so nice, so pretty, so accepting. But > eventually it bothered me for this reason: it confuses the object "music" with > the implicit subjects that "receive" the music. I appreciate the sound of waves > drawing up and sliding down the shingle. I appreciate the sound of a well-tuned > motorcycle engine purring like a big fat cat. But there is no music in "the > appreciation" of these sounds. Music is the "stuff", not the "appreciation of > stuff". And it's artificial, human-concocted stuff. It's a bag of tricks, not > the appreciation of a bag of tricks. It's very hard to talk about music without > giving most people the old feeling that "we murder to dissect". Elvis Costello > was quoted saying something like "talking about music is like dancing about > architecture". It can be done, but most people don't have the patience to > learn the technical lingo. Why should they? Let the academics spin the > elegantly structured ideas and analyses. I just want to write some decent music > - and I think you know what I mean. > > Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07357; 11 Feb 98 16:45 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa02310; 11 Feb 98 16:45 GMT Received: (qmail 17553 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 16:45:25 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 16:45:25 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (QAA21464); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:32:33 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 16:31:30 GMT Received: from [193.121.99.70] by hermes via ESMTP (QAA19733); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:31:07 GMT Received: from nobody ([193.74.7.111]) by hurricane.netgate.be (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-32575U60) with ESMTP id AAC292 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:34:48 +0100 From: David Schuyeteneer To: csound mailing list Subject: What is music ? Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:14:50 +0100 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19980211163427738.AAC292@nobody> Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk > So I let that quote "Music is the appreciation of sound" percolate in the back > of my brain for a while. It sounded so nice, so pretty, so accepting. But > eventually it bothered me for this reason: it confuses the object "music" with > the implicit subjects that "receive" the music. I appreciate the sound of waves > drawing up and sliding down the shingle. I appreciate the sound of a well-tuned > motorcycle engine purring like a big fat cat. But there is no music in "the > appreciation" of these sounds. Music is the "stuff", not the "appreciation of > stuff". And it's artificial, human-concocted stuff. It's a bag of tricks, not > the appreciation of a bag of tricks. It's very hard to talk about music without > giving most people the old feeling that "we murder to dissect". Elvis Costello > was quoted saying something like "talking about music is like dancing about > architecture". It can be done, but most people don't have the patience to > learn the technical lingo. Why should they? Let the academics spin the > elegantly structured ideas and analyses. I just want to write some decent music > - and I think you know what I mean. Music is the appreciation of structures in aesthetic psychofictional space. That'll do it. This modification of the quote encompasses everything. Give it a try..you'll see. David. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07382; 11 Feb 98 16:53 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa02641; 11 Feb 98 16:52 GMT Received: (qmail 5690 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 16:51:45 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 16:51:45 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (QAA18127); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:32:51 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 16:31:12 GMT Received: from [193.121.99.70] by hermes via ESMTP (QAA25150); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:31:03 GMT Received: from nobody ([193.74.7.111]) by hurricane.netgate.be (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-32575U60) with ESMTP id AAB292 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:34:39 +0100 From: David Schuyeteneer To: csound mailing list Subject: Electroacoustic music: some thoughts. + Csound contest !! Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:07:37 +0100 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19980211163427738.AAB292@nobody> Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk > >I listened to it over and over again and slowly became discouraged : I > >couldn't figure out > >HOW the hell the contributors build those magnificent sounds > > I have not heard the sounds so I cannot really comment on them although I > did listen to some of the real audio examples from other CD's on the same > label on a web site. Anyway they seem to use samples with a lot of > processing. The following is an idea from a Keyboard magazine article > which might give you something like what you are after or at least > something unusual. > > It requires a fairly good sound editor (I use Cool Edit but Csound could be > used as well) and a fair amount of hard disk space (~100-200 MB should be > good) > > 1. Start with a sample of a complex sound. The original author recommended > using rude noises created with your hand against your mouth. Any complex > sound will do, like spoken phrases, animal noises etc. It's OK to use a > cheap microphone too. > > 2. Start processing the sound. Try pitch shifting. The first time perhaps > it won't sound too great. That's OK, pitch shift it again. Do it ten > times...twenty. Don't be shy. Try going back and forth between a variety > of effects. Reverb, delay, pitch-shift, flange, wave shaping etc. Chop up > the sample. Rearrange it. Apply effects to only parts of the sample. If > it doesn't sound good don't worry just keep processing it. > > 3. Listen to the sample after each process. 90% of it will sound like > crap...but 10% will sound OK. When you get something that sounds OK save > it. Then keep processing. > > 4. When you get 10-20 of these OK sounds select the best 1-2 and save them. > Then start over. You can generate a large library of complex ambient > sounds this way. Perhaps only 1 in 100 sound good and only 1 in 1000 will > be real gems. The more you work at it the better you will get. > > 5. Finally you can apply some amplitude or filter envelopes to fade them in > and out and string them into longer pieces. Thanks, but these what you describe above is not really my problem..I don't suffer from being uncertain that my sounds will be too shy or whatever, what I'm a bit frustrated about is that those professional academic composers of electroacoustics seem to have found a way of mysterious control over their sounds. It is as if they construct their compositions in such a way that one soundevent triggers another, wich acts as a cause to yet another piece of sound..etc... Because I'm a totally "volunteer" in Csound and non-attached to an institute I cannot estimate how much of the officially released works are " simply-done-by-experiment " and how much of it is really composed with great care and musical knowledge and all that...you see ? What keeps me being interested in experimental electroacoustics is the emotional and intellectual content AND the structures of it : interaction of soundevents....As a visual artist (mainly oil painting) I can ASSURE you that electroacoustic music is the ultimate sonic counterpart of visual arts. I wish I could build a sonic canvas like those composer do. Let's do a Csound composition contest : A (funny?) of to all Csound composers in this list : How would you personally compose a sonic equivalent of this picture : an white plane stretching in infinitly in all directions. One person walks there and seems to look for something. Note that the environment is surreal : imagine that the ground where the person walks on was a generated by math function, only to indicate how infinite and flat it is. David. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07441; 11 Feb 98 16:58 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa03250; 11 Feb 98 16:58 GMT Received: (qmail 17651 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 16:58:42 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 16:58:42 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (QAA23900); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:32:45 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 16:31:36 GMT Received: from [193.121.99.70] by hermes via ESMTP (QAA14937); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:31:18 GMT Received: from nobody ([193.74.7.111]) by hurricane.netgate.be (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-32575U60) with ESMTP id AAD292 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:34:58 +0100 From: David Schuyeteneer To: csound mailing list Subject: All that music ! Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:24:30 +0100 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19980211163427738.AAD292@nobody> Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk > 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. Yes. Those who strive for the ultimate imitation of natural music by computers are losers. Music is something spiritual IN THE FIRST PLACE. It cannot be replaced by a set of digital chips producing a stream of numbers based on algorithms. True music is always a FYSICAL interaction between the player and it's instrument(s). David. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07472; 11 Feb 98 17:05 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa03453; 11 Feb 98 17:04 GMT Received: (qmail 7933 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 17:05:02 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 17:05:02 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (QAA13624); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:50:14 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 16:49:42 GMT Received: from GS160.SP.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.203.172] by hermes via SMTP (QAA13681); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:49:26 GMT Message-Id: <199802111649.QAA13681@hermes> Subject: Re: discouraged To: Csound mailing list Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:48:53 -0500 (EST) From: Eli Brandt In-Reply-To: <9802110513.AA15666@is.com> from "Michael Pelz-Sherman" at Feb 10, 98 11:13:24 pm X-Portmanteau: pantryptaminergeticallysisterrainbowtie X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25-40] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Michael Pelz-Sherman wrote: > 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. You know your compositional technique better than I do, but isn't Csound an awfully painful tool for this sort of thing? > Tools like CSound offer so much signal processing power that one is > tempted to focus on timbre to the exclusion of all else. "Timbre" is parallel to "pitch", "volume", etc. as properties of a note event; these may not be the most useful concepts for music that starts from sound rather than notes. We have yet to show, perhaps, that we can really walk without the crutch of the note, but it's worth a try. My trouble with computer music is just that the tools are too clumsy to do what I want with them. -- Eli Brandt \| eli+@cs.cmu.edu \| http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~eli/ Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07539; 11 Feb 98 17:25 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa04316; 11 Feb 98 17:25 GMT Received: (qmail 17846 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 17:25:24 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 17:25:24 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (QAA09930); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:54:51 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 16:54:31 GMT Received: from root@huitzilo.tezcat.com [204.128.247.17] by hermes via ESMTP (QAA26204); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 16:54:23 GMT Received: from [204.248.80.120] (antiorp.tezcat.com [204.248.80.120]) by huitzilo.tezcat.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/tezcat-96091001) with SMTP id KAA16757 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 10:54:19 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199802111654.KAA16757@huitzilo.tezcat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 10:58:36 -0600 To: csound mailing list From: =cw4t7abs Subject: Re: All that music ! Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >> 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. > >Yes. Those who strive for the ultimate imitation of natural music by >computers are losers. =3D true [_+!llogikl] _+ Those who strive for the ultimate imitation =3D true . d!skouraged. > Music >is something spiritual IN THE FIRST PLACE. It cannot be replaced by a set >of digital chips producing >a stream of numbers based on algorithms. =3D falsz >True music =3D true true !=3D ecz!st > is always a FYSICAL >interaction between >the player and it's instrument(s). =3D f!z!kl zucx federaL bureau ov suggezt!on \| d!v!s!on ov kr!t!kL phenomena \| 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 \|kr=F8p3r=F8m\|a\|9\|f\|f\|dbUg3rztr2p hTTp://www.god-emil.dk/=3Dcw4t7abs Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07550; 11 Feb 98 17:31 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa04503; 11 Feb 98 17:31 GMT Received: (qmail 17878 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 17:31:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 17:31:09 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (RAA15469); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:05:07 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 17:04:37 GMT Received: from huitzilo.tezcat.com [204.128.247.17] by hermes via ESMTP (RAA20210); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:04:23 GMT Received: from [204.248.80.120] (antiorp.tezcat.com [204.248.80.120]) by huitzilo.tezcat.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/tezcat-96091001) with SMTP id LAA17126 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:03:53 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199802111703.LAA17126@huitzilo.tezcat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:08:11 -0600 To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at UK.AC.Bath.maths.stork From: =cw4t7abs Subject: Re: discouraged Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >"Timbre" is parallel to "pitch", "volume", etc. as properties of a >note event; these may not be the most useful concepts for music that >starts from sound rather than notes. We have yet to show, perhaps, >that we can really walk without the crutch of the note, but it's worth >a try. My trouble with computer music is just that the tools are too >clumsy to do what I want with them. csound = clumsy due2 sekuent!al + arka!k clumsy = des!red at t!mez Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07586; 11 Feb 98 17:54 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa05195; 11 Feb 98 17:54 GMT Received: (qmail 14094 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 17:54:22 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 17:54:22 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (RAA03542); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:40:27 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 17:40:07 GMT Received: from cougar.isg.siue.edu [146.163.5.29] by hermes via ESMTP (RAA04500); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:39:47 GMT Received: from localhost (jbeuckm@localhost) by cougar.isg.siue.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA05296 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:39:42 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: cougar.isg.siue.edu: jbeuckm owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:39:41 -0600 (CST) From: "joe.beuckman" X-Sender: jbeuckm@cougar Reply-To: "joe.beuckman" To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: Re: All that musik ! In-Reply-To: <199802111654.KAA16757@huitzilo.tezcat.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk > >> 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. and it is "common since" which can and will be taught to a computer. > >Yes. Those who strive for the ultimate imitation of natural music by > >computers are losers. hmm. don't know quite what this one means, but if you want a real discussion, mail me about what is natural and what is not. computers are natural. please tell me what you mean. > > Music > >is something spiritual IN THE FIRST PLACE. It cannot be replaced by a set > >of digital chips producing > >a stream of numbers based on algorithms. sh!te. you misunderstand "digital chips", "stream of numbers" and "algorithms". please tell what you think these things are. why are you on csound mailing list? how are tools different from tools? > > is always a FYSICAL > >interaction between > >the player and it's instrument(s). > = f!z!kl zucx about the only fizicle part of music for me is that my ear drums have to vibrate to get the information to my brain. i could really care less about how the music is produced. a physikal reaction is indeed required for music but is not the music itself something apart from this reaction? -j0e Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07734; 11 Feb 98 18:45 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa06792; 11 Feb 98 18:45 GMT Received: (qmail 18306 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 18:45:26 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 18:45:26 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (SAA00610); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 18:37:22 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 18:37:06 GMT Received: from [193.121.99.70] by hermes via ESMTP (SAA02794); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 18:36:58 GMT Received: from nobody ([193.74.7.181]) by hurricane.netgate.be (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-32575U60) with ESMTP id AAB302 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:40:48 +0100 From: David Schuyeteneer To: csound mailing list Subject: HRTF 3D audio severe chopping Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:14:50 +0100 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19980211184043010.AAB302@nobody> Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk I experimented a bit with complex Csound features like cross synthesis and convolution and also HRTF 3D audio.....They work fine but not HRTF....HRTF uses a mono soundfile and places it in virtual 3D space, but the example provided with the Csound manual causes extreme short pulse chopping as the sound progresses its path on the 3D circle. Why ? David. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07744; 11 Feb 98 18:47 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa06894; 11 Feb 98 18:47 GMT Received: (qmail 18313 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 18:47:24 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 18:47:24 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (SAA10611); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 18:41:13 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 18:40:46 GMT Received: from f44.hotmail.com [207.82.250.55] by hermes via SMTP (SAA16292); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 18:40:26 GMT Received: (qmail 4589 invoked by uid 0); 11 Feb 1998 18:39:54 -0000 Message-Id: <19980211183954.4588.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 207.172.114.82 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 10:39:53 PST X-Originating-Ip: [207.172.114.82] From: Paul Winkler To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: Re: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 10:39:53 PST Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk > >> This guy has nothing to say > > > and she is saying it... Drat. That was going to be MY joke. > > > >433 > > That reminds me... I've been thinking of doing a csound orchestration of 4'33", but I'm not getting very far with it. I've looked all through the manual but I can't find an opcode to simulate doing nothing. Can anyone help me? Regards, PW ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07880; 11 Feb 98 19:10 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07509; 11 Feb 98 19:10 GMT Received: (qmail 20864 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 19:10:06 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 19:10:06 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA05211); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:02:30 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 19:02:16 GMT Received: from Thuban.AC.HMC.Edu [134.173.53.8] (may be forged) by hermes via ESMTP (TAA01659); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:02:09 GMT Received: from [134.173.38.61] (Spjut.Eng.HMC.Edu) by THUBAN.AC.HMC.EDU (PMDF V5.1-7 #25450) with ESMTP id <01ITG97ZST3W8WW971@THUBAN.AC.HMC.EDU> for csound@maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:02:08 PST Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:04:49 -0800 From: Erik Spjut Subject: Re: Csound and Music and aesthetics In-Reply-To: <199802111654.KAA16757@huitzilo.tezcat.com> X-Sender: spjut@thuban.ac.hmc.edu To: csound mailing list Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Please listen to the following .orc and .sco and then read the rest of the message. ;orc *********** sr = 44100 kr = 441 ksmps = 100 nchnls = 2 ;----------------------------------------------- instr 5 a1 linseg 0,0.01,20000,p3-0.01,20000,0.01,0,1,0 a2 expon 20,p3,176400 a3 oscil a1,a2,p4 outs a30, 5a30 endin ;end orc ********* ;sco ***** f1 0 16384 10 1 ;sine f2 0 16384 10 1000 0 333 0 200 0 143 0 111 0 91 0 77 0 67 0 59 0 53 0 ;square f3 0 16384 10 1000 500 333 250 200 167 143 125 111 100 91 83 77 71 67 ;sawtooth f4 0 16384 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ;impulse-like ;----------------------------------------------------- ; tbl ; # ;------------- i5 0 60 1 i5 60 60 2 i5 120 60 3 i5 180 60 4 i5 240 33 1 ;end sco **** The above was an exact Csound performance of one of the seminal pieces of 20th Century Music (The title is hidden in the sco). I find that the Csound version moves me just as deeply as an acoustic piano performance of the piece. While it was playing, did you hear the fan in your computer? Did you hear the air moving through your ventilation system? Did you hear flies buzzing or people down the hall talking? Did you ponder the meaning of "The Emperor's New Clothes?" If not, you missed the whole point of the piece. Hamlet: And therefore as a stranger give it welcome. There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Erik Spjut (rhymes with cute) - Acting Director,The Center for Design Education and/or Associate Professor of Engineering Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711 USA Erik_Spjut@hmc.edu Ph & Voice mail (909) 607-3890 Fax (909) 621-8967 Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07894; 11 Feb 98 19:18 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07844; 11 Feb 98 19:17 GMT Received: (qmail 21457 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 19:18:00 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 19:18:00 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA08197); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:10:52 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 19:10:20 GMT Received: from [193.121.99.70] by hermes via ESMTP (TAA00726); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:10:11 GMT Received: from nobody ([193.74.7.181]) by hurricane.netgate.be (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-32575U60) with ESMTP id AAA301 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:13:58 +0100 From: David Schuyeteneer To: csound mailing list Subject: Who the hell is =cw4t7abs ???????????? Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:40:55 +0100 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19980211191356577.AAA301@nobody> Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk What the hell is this ?? Why does he/she speak in that silly pseudo programming code ?? Can anyone tell me ?? David. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07912; 11 Feb 98 19:18 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07849; 11 Feb 98 19:18 GMT Received: (qmail 18460 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 19:18:28 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 19:18:28 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA20508); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:10:56 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 19:10:35 GMT Received: from [193.121.99.70] by hermes via ESMTP (TAA11858); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:10:17 GMT Received: from nobody ([193.74.7.181]) by hurricane.netgate.be (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-32575U60) with ESMTP id AAC301 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:14:04 +0100 From: David Schuyeteneer To: csound mailing list Subject: Try this webpage ! Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:54:13 +0100 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19980211191356577.AAC301@nobody> Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk that guy has a webpage too ! Give it a try, but don't wear headphones or put 'em low volume cause there's a HARSH intro sound. comment : weird because the page is only darkness and it seems to warp you to other dark places.. hTTp://www.god-emil.dk/=cw4t7abs Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07918; 11 Feb 98 19:18 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07854; 11 Feb 98 19:18 GMT Received: (qmail 21494 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 19:18:32 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 19:18:32 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA25524); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:12:52 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 19:12:34 GMT Received: from f13.hotmail.com [207.82.250.24] by hermes via SMTP (TAA24526); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:11:51 GMT Received: (qmail 11698 invoked by uid 0); 11 Feb 1998 19:11:04 -0000 Message-Id: <19980211191104.11697.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 207.172.114.82 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:10:58 PST X-Originating-Ip: [207.172.114.82] From: Paul Winkler To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: Re: discouraged Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:10:58 PST Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >From: mps@is.com (Michael Pelz-Sherman) > >Oh what the hey, I'll jump in on this one... (snipped stuff I agree with) >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. But the work is worthwhile, yes? Or do you feel that it's just an unsatisfying substitute for unavailable musicians or instruments? >Tools like CSound offer so much signal processing power that one is tempted to focus on timbre to the >exclusion of all else. I disagree. I consider it an advantage of csound, cmix, etc. that there are possibilities for timbral control beyond anything that exists with acoustic instruments. The possibility of writing music focused on structures of timbre rather than of pitch greatly enriches the world, at least for me. >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. "It's not a bug, it's a feature." Speaking as someone who also plays and composes for some run-of-the-mill "real" instruments (electric bass, guitar, voice), when I am composing by typing a score file, or an rt note list, or whatever, I find the non-realtime aspect of it completely fascinating. There's something eerie and compelling about the relationship between what I think I am writing and what comes out of the DAC. The first sound is almost always surprising. After that there is the process of editing the instructions, adding to the instruments, etc. in a "dialogue" with the test playbacks. I can get into a contemplative mode that is most similar to experiences I have had with sculpting-- adding something, stepping back and looking at the whole, stepping forward and moving some large structural parts around, cutting off a small bit, tacking on something else, stepping back again ... this process is very involving and deeply satisfying and is very unlike what I do with a guitar and a noteboook. >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. ?? What is this "common sense"? You're talking about some pretty uncommon composers there. If you mean that you want your electronic music to sound intuitively similar to familiar acoustic music, well, that's one way to do it... though I've never seen the point myself. If I've misunderstood you... well then I've misunderstood you! --PW ============================================================== Paul Winkler --- music & sound --- zarmzarm@hotmail.com a member of ARMS --- an ongoing pop music experiment --- our first album, URBAN SUNDIAL is now available.....on CD, vinyl, and cassette from Label 12 13..................contact: sonic113@pobox.com Also -- improvised & electronic music releases are coming real soon, dirt cheap from plan B cassette works and label 12 13... ============================================================== ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07948; 11 Feb 98 19:44 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08419; 11 Feb 98 19:44 GMT Received: (qmail 18548 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 19:44:05 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 19:44:05 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA17512); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:37:41 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 19:37:24 GMT Received: from f139.hotmail.com [207.82.251.18] by hermes via SMTP (TAA12744); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:37:12 GMT Received: (qmail 19380 invoked by uid 0); 11 Feb 1998 19:36:44 -0000 Message-Id: <19980211193644.19379.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 207.172.114.82 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:36:43 PST X-Originating-Ip: [207.172.114.82] From: Paul Winkler To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: Re: What is music ? Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:36:43 PST Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >From: davids@pavell.com (David Schuyeteneer) >Music is the appreciation of structures in aesthetic psychofictional space. Hmmm... so is a psychedelic experience... or schizophrenia (in a good mood)... (mind you I have not experienced either of these so I could be mistaken). my point being merely that these definitions are nearly always either too narrow (i.e. exclude things that are arguably music) or too broad (i.e. include things that no one would argue are music). So it's really hard to come up with one that's of any use. Though if anyone wants to argue that chemically induced experiences are music, I would love to hear it. --PW ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07995; 11 Feb 98 20:02 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08932; 11 Feb 98 20:02 GMT Received: (qmail 24255 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 20:02:13 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 20:02:13 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA26180); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:49:18 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 19:48:59 GMT Received: from f73.hotmail.com [207.82.250.159] by hermes via SMTP (TAA12143); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:48:50 GMT Received: (qmail 9050 invoked by uid 0); 11 Feb 1998 19:48:17 -0000 Message-Id: <19980211194817.9049.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 207.172.114.82 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:48:17 PST X-Originating-Ip: [207.172.114.82] From: Paul Winkler To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: 4' 33", was Re: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:48:17 PST Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >That is odd. Many of my instruments do nothing very effectively. >Liek the shaker at amplitude under 16000 until 3.472 > ==John Thanks! I will try it! when I'm done I'll email you a WAV file of it so you can hear the piece for yourself! Maybe I'll post it to the mailing list! I know .wav files are kinda large, but maybe I'll zip it first. I think it might compress pretty well. Regards, PW ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08013; 11 Feb 98 20:14 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09263; 11 Feb 98 20:14 GMT Received: (qmail 18704 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 20:14:22 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 20:14:22 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (UAA13952); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:06:43 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 20:06:26 GMT Received: from root@xochi.tezcat.com [204.128.247.12] by hermes via ESMTP (UAA15674); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:06:13 GMT Received: from [204.248.80.120] (antiorp.tezcat.com [204.248.80.120]) by xochi.tezcat.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/tezcat-96091001) with SMTP id OAA01418 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:06:15 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199802112006.OAA01418@xochi.tezcat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:10:33 -0600 To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk From: =cw4t7abs Subject: opcode to simulate opcode Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >> >>> This guy has nothing to say >> >> >> and she is saying it... > >Drat. That was going to be MY joke. > >> >> >> >>433 >> >> > >That reminds me... I've been thinking of doing a csound orchestration of >4'33", but I'm not getting very far with it. I've looked all through the >manual but I can't find an opcode to simulate doing nothing. Can anyone >help me? a9ff\|\|8' b!t.ser!ez. =3D 433 * 433 sekx kont3nt.!d=3D 4'33 sampld.w!thout perm!szion. + granulatd.pvokd.hrtfd.mutatd.!nvertd. b!t.sch!fted.akkumulatd.smakkd.soLd. $kozt =3D End_of_Error exit(1); [p-un_kT-pr_o-T=96k_oL] =D8 f =D8 =D8 =D8 3 herausgegeben v=F8m internat!onalen !nstitut f:ur ordnung \|+\| d!sziplin hTTp://www.tezcat.com/~antiorp neuro-hak.erz vs nwo _\|\|- le masculin [ 1 1 0 1 8 ] et la fraktur symbol!que. la r!poste hysterique Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08019; 11 Feb 98 20:14 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09268; 11 Feb 98 20:14 GMT Received: (qmail 25095 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 20:14:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 20:14:30 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (UAA21464); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:09:05 GMT Received: from dns0 by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 20:08:46 GMT Received: from soli.inav.net [199.120.107.103] by sunny via ESMTP (UAA17321); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:05:20 GMT Received: from soli.inav.net (soli.inav.net [199.120.107.103]) by soli.inav.net (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA09597; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 13:59:49 -0600 Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 13:59:49 -0600 (CST) From: Clytemnestra's Favorite Uncle To: Paul Winkler Cc: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: Re: What is music ? In-Reply-To: <19980211193644.19379.qmail@hotmail.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk On Wed, 11 Feb 1998, Paul Winkler wrote: > > >From: davids@pavell.com (David Schuyeteneer) > > >Music is the appreciation of structures in aesthetic psychofictional > space. > > Hmmm... so is a psychedelic experience... or schizophrenia (in a good > mood)... (mind you I have not experienced either of these so I could be > mistaken). > Let me see if I can come up with a few definitions of Music. 1. Music is the artful arrangement of mechanical vibration in the time domain. 2. Music is a lense with which to focus the ears. 3. Music is the best argument for the forward motion of time. 4. Music is what your brain makes when your ears feel happy. 5. Music is the endless echo of what you hear in the womb before you're born. 6. Music is the perfect exaltation of ephemeral phenomena. 7. Music is the conversation that has no words. 8. Music is a tribute to silence in it's absence. 9. Music is what happens once you get the hell away from Music School. 10. Music is the perfect manifestation in the outside world of the human soul. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08033; 11 Feb 98 20:26 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09578; 11 Feb 98 20:25 GMT Received: (qmail 18749 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 20:25:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 20:25:54 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (UAA27729); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:19:58 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 20:19:39 GMT Received: from empire.is.com [204.120.8.200] by hermes via SMTP (UAA14205); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:19:30 GMT Received: from is.com by empire.is.com; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:19:37 -0600 Received: from ganesha by is.com with SMTP (NX5.67e/IS-Mailhost-1.0.1/plex_net3) id AA28073; Wed, 11 Feb 98 14:19:05 -0600 Message-Id: <00b701bd372b$524f92f0$bf0b78cc@ganesha.is.com> From: Michael Pelz-Sherman To: Paul Winkler , csound@maths.ex.ac.uk MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at UK.AC.Bath.maths.stork Subject: Re: discouraged Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:26:23 -0600 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >>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. > >But the work is worthwhile, yes? Or do you feel that it's just an >unsatisfying substitute for unavailable musicians or instruments? Sure it's worthwhile! My point is that in general, people tend to spend too much time worrying about timbre, to the detriment of musical "quality". I thought the person who posted the original message was getting discouraged about not being able to get the kinds of timbres he was looking for, and I was trying to encourage him to focus on the musical structure rather than worrying so much about timbre. But hey - I'm not here to define what musical "quality" is. I happen to be a huge fan of real-time performance as opposed to "studio" music; I guess I just get bored listening to the same CD over and over, no matter how good it is. That's not to say that there hasn't been a lot of great studio music created, some of it even with tools as clunky as Csound! >>Tools like CSound offer so much signal processing power that one is >tempted to focus on timbre to the >>exclusion of all else. > >I disagree. I consider it an advantage of csound, cmix, etc. that there >are possibilities for timbral control beyond anything that exists with >acoustic instruments. The possibility of writing music focused on >structures of timbre rather than of pitch greatly enriches the world, at >least for me. There is a difference between "richness of possibility" and expressive power. To be expressive you need some kind of paradigmatic structure, which I find lacking in timbre but present in pitch. BTW, I have composed several "non-pitch-oriented" pieces, and found this in general to be a less satisfying experience than working with pitched materials. Of course, one possibility computers offer (one that is greatly underexplored IMO) is microtonality, that is, pitch systems OTHER than 12 equal-tempered notes per octave. >>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. > >"It's not a bug, it's a feature." [ chop] Yes, there is an element of "instant gratification" that is intensely satisfying. I am quite familiar with this phenomenon. However, the end result tends not to hold up to repeated listening, because the deep structure of the music is either non-existent or incomprehensible. >>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. > >?? What is this "common sense"? You're talking about some pretty >uncommon composers there. If you mean that you want your electronic >music to sound intuitively similar to familiar acoustic music, well, >that's one way to do it... though I've never seen the point myself. If >I've misunderstood you... well then I've misunderstood you! > >--PW Well, common sense is pretty uncommon in life and in music. What I mean by it is the elusive quality of "musicality" that many people are able to recognize when they hear but is so difficult to articulate, just as the rules of "common sense" in everyday life can be. I think the electronic music pieces that succeed do so by being musical - a concept which for me at least transcends "style". - mps Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08117; 11 Feb 98 21:03 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa10564; 11 Feb 98 21:03 GMT Received: (qmail 28152 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 21:03:40 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 21:03:40 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (UAA11505); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:57:21 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 20:57:03 GMT Received: from soli.inav.net [199.120.107.103] by hermes via ESMTP (UAA26386); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:56:55 GMT Received: from soli.inav.net (soli.inav.net [199.120.107.103]) by soli.inav.net (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA15575; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:56:45 -0600 Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 14:56:45 -0600 (CST) From: Clytemnestra's Favorite Uncle To: tildy@ella.mills.edu Cc: zarmzarm@hotmail.com, csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: Re: What is music ? In-Reply-To: <19980211204944.7314.qmail@ella.mills.edu> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 tildy@ella.mills.edu wrote: > Clytemnestra's Favorite Uncle opined, > > [ten speculative definitions of music snipped] > > I'd like to add one: How about, "Music is what happens when > you quit trying to define Music and begin to listen"...? > Actually I was listening to music when I wrote that ;-) and I'm listening to Mike and Rich 'Expert Knob Twiddlers' right now... Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08182; 11 Feb 98 21:32 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa11246; 11 Feb 98 21:32 GMT Received: (qmail 19026 invoked from network); 11 Feb 1998 21:32:23 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 11 Feb 1998 21:32:23 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (VAA26355); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 21:26:51 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Wed, 11 Feb 98 21:26:33 GMT Received: from endeavor.flash.net [209.30.0.40] by hermes via ESMTP (VAA12542); Wed, 11 Feb 1998 21:26:26 GMT Received: from flash.net (fwasc2-62.flash.net [209.30.14.62]) by endeavor.flash.net (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA20090 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 15:26:25 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <34E217AA.A651EB85@flash.net> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 15:27:07 -0600 From: pete moss Organization: pete moss GmbH X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: csound Subject: Re: discouraged References: <3.0.3.16.19980209200854.18efbee2@werewolf.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk i think i have a bit to add to this whole discussion of what is music. i study music comp at texas christian univ. i also study a bit of csound with dr gerry gabel. there seems to be a problem people are having between traditional musical tools and using a computer. several months ago, a wonderful guy named noel zahler visited and gave some private lessons to us students. while i didnt necessarily agree with everything he said, one thing did strike me. he has quite some experience with csound and so i asked for a lesson having to do with csound. i asked him about whether i should use space more in the music i showed him. he said that one of the strong points about computer music is that it allows control over where music is placed and that i should use it all the time. this got me to thinking. just as you dont use a screwdriver to hammer nails, there are certain things that are better suited to computer. if i want to write, say, a string quartet, i am better off using traditional methods. and if i wanted to make more 'synthetic' sounds, i would use the computer. now granted, there is some crossover, but as a general rule i would not want to use csound to create a string sound and then program in a note list. it wiould be better and more fruitful to use traditional instruments. i guess what i am trying to say is that each tool has its uses and one should not be expected to completely take over the functions of another. pete Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08600; 12 Feb 98 0:57 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa16600; 12 Feb 98 0:56 GMT Received: (qmail 19976 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 00:56:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 00:56:51 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (AAA08313); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 00:53:14 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 00:52:57 GMT Received: from jaguars-int.cableinet.net [193.38.113.9] by hermes via SMTP (AAA19082); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 00:52:51 GMT Received: (qmail 31184 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 00:48:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cableinet.co.uk) (194.117.146.29) by jaguars with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 00:48:53 -0000 Message-Id: <34E24556.491977DC@cableinet.co.uk> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 00:41:59 +0000 From: Richard Dobson Reply-To: RWD@cableinet.co.uk Organization: Composers Desktop Project X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: csound Subject: Re: discouraged References: <3.0.3.16.19980209200854.18efbee2@werewolf.net> <34E217AA.A651EB85@flash.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Wow! What an amazing thread this has turned out to be. Nothing silly, all the posts interesting, full of detailed thoughts I could easily follow up - how to choose? Well I cannot, except to give the thought that much of the discussion seems to turn on what could be called (has been called?) 'the problem of 20th Century Music'. I would explain that thus: (yes, this is an apalling account of musical history, but bear with me...) The development of musical content and form was until the end of the 19th century essentially incremental - composers drew on,and added to, a familiar, well-established canon of formal and stylistic structures, such that any non-naive audience would recognize, farily reliably, what was going on. Even a huge Brucknerian symphony could be recognized as sharing primary elements in common with a 16th century dance, say, thanks to the persistent usefulness of Binary Form and the Perfect Cadence. With the 20th Century, we enter a new paradigm. A composer is less inclined to hang melodic, rhythmic, harmonic, coloristic ideas on recognised forms and structures. Instead, forms and structures (and in our case the sounds themselves) are invented anew for each piece. There may be solid formal or philosophical reasons for this, but it has undoubtedly left audiences (and even fellow composers) in something of a quandary, lacking sufficient frames of reference which can assist in, or even justify, listening. The verbose, and frequently highly technical, programme note (unique to this century, so far as I can ascertain) is an hardly adequate substitute. As recent posts have shown, this paradigm shift can provoke deep feelings. The quandary, for both composer and listener, can be summarized as follows. 1. The composer may use a structure for purely personal satisfaction, and has no desire that the listener perceive it. 2. The use of a structure by a composer does not guarantee that a listener will perceive it. 3. Failure to perceive a structure does not guarantee that there is no structure. 4(a). The perception of a structure does not guarantee that it is the structure the composer designed (the 'Schenkerian paradox'?). 4(b). The perception of a structure does not guarantee that there is any structure at all. This probably applies to other art forms too. The need to find structure and even 'meaning' where there may be none 'by design' (I would cite Carl Sagan's apotheosis of pi in his novel 'Contact' as an example here) seems to me to be one of the defining, and precious, aspects of the human species (it is probably a sublimated survival mechanism) - but it amounts to something of a lottery from the composer's point of view! A piece of music ends up being a palimpsest - containing the forms the composer has created, the forms each listener perceives in it, and perhaps even the forms the composer perceives in it. Computer music, like Hamlet's clouds, seems especially well adapted to the creation of 'emergent features'. Given that we are unlikely to see a moratorium on new structures (to give audiences time to accumulate experience), this quandary looks set to continue. Richard Dobson Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08652; 12 Feb 98 1:39 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa17552; 12 Feb 98 1:39 GMT Received: (qmail 11671 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 01:39:11 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 01:39:11 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (BAB10167); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 01:35:59 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 01:35:43 GMT Received: from wfreno@opus.vcn.bc.ca [207.102.64.2] by hermes via ESMTP (BAA08948); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 01:35:36 GMT Received: from localhost (wfreno@localhost) by vcn.bc.ca (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA21504 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:34:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:34:17 -0800 (PST) From: Wayne Freno To: Csound List Subject: Csound recordings Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Hi all, Are there any recordings in existance in which any part of the instrumentation is Csound? I want to see if I can get 'em locally. Thanks. Wayne F. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08676; 12 Feb 98 1:59 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa18061; 12 Feb 98 1:58 GMT Received: (qmail 20220 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 01:58:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 01:58:54 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (BAA24472); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 01:56:09 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 01:55:53 GMT Received: from root@huitzilo.tezcat.com [204.128.247.17] by hermes via ESMTP (BAA17664); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 01:55:46 GMT Received: from [204.248.80.120] (antiorp.tezcat.com [204.248.80.120]) by huitzilo.tezcat.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/tezcat-96091001) with SMTP id TAA07149 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 19:55:47 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199802120155.TAA07149@huitzilo.tezcat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 20:00:06 -0600 To: Csound List From: =cw4t7abs Subject: Re: Csound recordings Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >Hi all, > >Are there any recordings in existance in which >any part of the instrumentation is Csound? >I want to see if I can get 'em locally. Thanks. krop3rom\|\|a9ff hTTp://www.god-emil.dk/=cw4t7abs _+ hTTp://www.god-emil.dk/spCa = anti.decibel pro.tezt.s!te. + lokat!on ov mp.3z ov ent!re cd - shortl+e. so az 2 kombat fakt decibel rekordz = h!jakd cd. = csound + realt!me csound = superkoll!der _+ part!all+e Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09024; 12 Feb 98 4:37 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa25771; 12 Feb 98 4:37 GMT Received: (qmail 16880 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 04:37:08 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 04:37:08 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (EAA02907); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 04:34:13 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 04:33:56 GMT Received: from ns1.umkc.edu [134.193.1.2] by hermes via ESMTP (EAA13854); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 04:33:49 GMT Received: from [134.193.217.81] (dialup2-81.umkc.edu [134.193.217.81]) by ns1.umkc.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id WAA25594 for ; Wed, 11 Feb 1998 22:33:51 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199802120433.WAA25594@ns1.umkc.edu> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express for Macintosh - 4.0a (190) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 22:42:54 +0000 Subject: Re: Csound recordings From: "M. Ray McFerron" To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk You should try to get some of the SEAMUS CD's. Most University Libraries should have them....I do know a few pieces on these CD's that were made ENTIRELY w/ csound and a few that simply take advantage of it's synthesis capabilities. (If I'm not mistaken, SEAMUS CD #6 has a work by Matt Ingalls - our favorite Mac csound guy...well one of them) MRM ************************** M. Ray McFerron 302 E. 26th Ave North Kansas City, MO 64116 http://cctr.umkc.edu/~mmcferron ************************** ---------- >From: Wayne Freno >To: Csound List >Subject: Csound recordings >Date: Thu, Feb 12, 1998, 1:34 AM > >Hi all, > >Are there any recordings in existance in which >any part of the instrumentation is Csound? >I want to see if I can get 'em locally. Thanks. > >Wayne F. > > Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09314; 12 Feb 98 7:23 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa29592; 12 Feb 98 7:22 GMT Received: (qmail 20714 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 07:22:56 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 07:22:56 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (HAA12165); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 07:19:17 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 07:19:00 GMT Received: from agora.stm.it [195.62.32.1] by hermes via ESMTP (HAA11156); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 07:18:54 GMT Received: from default (ppp04-08.stm.it [195.62.37.200]) by agora.stm.it (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA06256; Thu, 12 Feb 1998 08:18:48 +0100 (ITA) Message-Id: <34E19664.82A83366@agora.stm.it> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 13:15:32 +0100 From: Gabriel Maldonado X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.0 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Christophe Cc: Csound Mailing List Subject: Re: Tips for newbies X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <19980210124418691.AAA124@Cyrix> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Christophe wrote: > The question is : why do I need an SCO file when I use a MIDI file as > note > input ? for generating tables and for some global instruments activation. Also, in case of realtime MIDI performance, a score is necessary for giving a non-null time of Csound operation (use f0 for this) > The second is : If I must use a SCO file , what is the minimal > commands a > SCO file must contains ? For realtime performance at least one f0 statement is required. > Conclusion : using SCO file is not my goal, I prefer to generate > separate > waves to be used in a multitrack audio sequencer. It is a good alternative to normal sco files; but you can only give 3 init parameters to each note via MIDI (channel i.e. instr-number, note-number and velocity) while using 'i' statements the number of p-fields is not limited so you can construct a more complex instrument behavior. To partially resolve this limit of MIDI you can use continuous controller messages with your instruments best Gabriel Maldonado mailto:g.maldonado@agora.stm.it http://www.agora.stm.it/G.Maldonado/home2.htm http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Way/7041/home2.htm Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09378; 12 Feb 98 8:01 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa00507; 12 Feb 98 8:00 GMT Received: (qmail 21663 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 08:01:00 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 08:01:00 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (HAA23873); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 07:58:03 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 07:43:02 GMT Received: from imo22.mx.aol.com [198.81.19.150] by hermes via ESMTP (HAA03929); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 07:42:44 GMT From: Allotropa@aol.com Received: from Allotropa@aol.com by imo22.mx.aol.com (IMOv12/Dec1997) id LIFCa13022 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 1998 02:42:19 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 02:42:19 EST To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: GENs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 18 Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk I'm new to this list as well as Csound (I just installed it a couple days ago in my PC), so this may be a silly question only a beginner would ask. But I'm wondering why the score files contain info on the sounds, i.e. the GEN routines. It seems like the score file should just have notes as well as other info to control the instruments, and the orchestra file should have all info about the instruments the score plays, including the sound that instrument produces. Why this inconsistency? Why is info on the sound of instruments spread across both files? Anthony Lombardi http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palms/6935 Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09567; 12 Feb 98 9:51 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa03967; 12 Feb 98 9:51 GMT Received: (qmail 1255 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 09:51:07 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 09:51:07 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (JAA17979); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 09:44:34 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 09:44:14 GMT Received: from jaguars-int.cableinet.net [193.38.113.9] by hermes via SMTP (JAA22490); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 09:44:06 GMT Received: (qmail 3748 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 09:40:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cableinet.co.uk) (194.117.146.102) by jaguars with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 09:40:02 -0000 Message-Id: <34E2C1FE.D312D9DB@cableinet.co.uk> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 09:33:51 +0000 From: Richard Dobson Reply-To: RWD@cableinet.co.uk Organization: Composers Desktop Project X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: Wayne Freno Cc: Csound List Subject: Re: Csound recordings References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Try a recent release on em:t - no 2297, 'beatsystem', which is almost all Csound. It is composed by a friend and colleague of mine, Derek Pierce. Huge granular washes, time-stretching, all sorts of things! I don't know how well em:t is distributed down your way, but it has been available in Europe, Japan and places for a while. There are several enthusiastic reviews on the net, if you search on the name. Richard Dobson Wayne Freno wrote: > Hi all, > > Are there any recordings in existance in which > any part of the instrumentation is Csound? > I want to see if I can get 'em locally. Thanks. > > Wayne F. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09636; 12 Feb 98 10:31 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa05469; 12 Feb 98 10:30 GMT Received: (qmail 22418 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 10:30:50 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 10:30:50 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (KAA22659); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 10:21:02 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 10:20:43 GMT Received: from florence.pavilion.net [194.242.128.25] by hermes via ESMTP (KAA08430); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 10:20:37 GMT Received: from [194.242.131.68] (dialup1-04.pavilion.co.uk [194.242.131.68]) by florence.pavilion.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA14456; Thu, 12 Feb 1998 10:20:39 GMT (envelope-from hbyrne@pavilion.co.uk) X-Sender: hbyrne@mailhost.pavilion.co.uk Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <19980211193644.19379.qmail@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 10:30:59 +0000 To: Clytemnestra's Favorite Uncle From: Per Villez Subject: Re: What is music ? Cc: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk I'll stick with number 9. >On Wed, 11 Feb 1998, Paul Winkler wrote: > >> >> >From: davids@pavell.com (David Schuyeteneer) >> >> >Music is the appreciation of structures in aesthetic psychofictional >> space. >> >> Hmmm... so is a psychedelic experience... or schizophrenia (in a good >> mood)... (mind you I have not experienced either of these so I could be >> mistaken). >> >Let me see if I can come up with a few definitions of Music. > > 1. Music is the artful arrangement of mechanical vibration in the time > domain. > > 2. Music is a lense with which to focus the ears. > > 3. Music is the best argument for the forward motion of time. > > 4. Music is what your brain makes when your ears feel happy. > > 5. Music is the endless echo of what you hear in the womb before > you're born. > > 6. Music is the perfect exaltation of ephemeral phenomena. > > 7. Music is the conversation that has no words. > > 8. Music is a tribute to silence in it's absence. > > 9. Music is what happens once you get the hell away from Music School. > >10. Music is the perfect manifestation in the outside world of the > human soul. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09744; 12 Feb 98 11:18 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07627; 12 Feb 98 11:17 GMT Received: (qmail 22664 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 11:17:51 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 11:17:51 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (LAA25910); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:02:30 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 11:02:09 GMT Received: from [193.121.99.70] by hermes via ESMTP (LAA23493); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:02:00 GMT Received: from nobody ([193.74.7.120]) by hurricane.netgate.be (post.office MTA v2.0 0813 ID# 0-32575U60) with ESMTP id AAC294; Thu, 12 Feb 1998 12:05:26 +0100 From: David Schuyeteneer To: ashley scott Cc: csound mailing list Subject: Online Csound Competition ! Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:36:12 +0100 X-Msmail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19980212110509534.AAC294@nobody> Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk [chopped] > A 'competition' sounds like a good idea - like the FrogPeak CD that should > be coming out soon - about 80 contributors worked on the same sample. > Problem would be to find a way of distributing what everyone did: why not > collect contibutions at a central point and then dub DATs or CDs for a > limited time at a nominal charge? > > But wouldn't we have to elect a committee? to arse up the whole thing? Yeah.....think so....I'd really like to start a competition...Maybe we should have a virtual meeting in this list or on an IRC channel with volunteers of the Csound list.....We could post banners on major websites and personal websites to announce a initial meeting to let idea's stream in order to find a more solid shape of the competition ! David. Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09761; 12 Feb 98 11:21 GMT Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07775; 12 Feb 98 11:21 GMT Received: (qmail 13893 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 11:21:28 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 11:21:28 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (LAA21221); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:08:39 GMT From: J.Craine-ie3i7529@lmu.ac.uk Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 11:08:20 GMT Received: from jaffle.lmu.ac.uk [160.9.128.2] by hermes via SMTP (LAA22759); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:08:14 GMT Received: from jess-fddi.lmu.ac.uk (jess) [160.9.192.55] by jaffle.lmu.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 1.82 #1) id 0y2wal-0004Cv-00; Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:14:08 +0000 Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:14:06 +0000 (GMT) X-Sender: ie3i7529@jess To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: how to? Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk can csound have more than one waveform present in an orc file? I know the answer is yes, but can each waveform for example pulse saw rectangular sub osc be independently selectable? or do you need a seperate orc file for each combination? any suggestions jamie Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09835; 12 Feb 98 12:08 GMT Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09349; 12 Feb 98 12:07 GMT Received: (qmail 23025 invoked from network); 12 Feb 1998 12:07:53 -0000 Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14) by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 12 Feb 1998 12:07:53 -0000 Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (LAA13239); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:53:59 GMT Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 12 Feb 98 11:53:39 GMT Received: from jaffle.lmu.ac.uk [160.9.128.2] by hermes via SMTP (LAA03120); Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:53:33 GMT From: J.Craine-ie3i7529@lmu.ac.uk Received: from jess-fddi.lmu.ac.uk (jess) [160.9.192.55] by jaffle.lmu.ac.uk with smtp (Exim 1.82 #1) id 0y2xIc-0004to-00; Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:59:26 +0000 Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 11:59:24 +0000 (GMT) X-Sender: ie3i7529@jess Reply-To: J.Craine-ie3i7529@lmu.ac.uk To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk Subject: creativity and technology Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Csound is just another tool for creation of sound/music, every composer, musician, sound manipulator, whatever has a particular favorite. One which they work best with, the Royal College of Art computer related design faculty believe that technology in the hands of the artist is soon exhausted and only quickly reveals the limitations of the software and hardware, not how exciting or wonderful new technology is. This has nothing to do with csound but doesnt a child become quickly bored with a toy that does not yield anything exciting after a short period of time. For me attempting to develop all the themes within a piece in a limited rehearsal time is where I am best. Cathartic expression I suppose, a cleansing of the soul. jamie Maybe we should just leave the machines to make their own music. And competitions..... really.... come on whos the best.... not what its about at all is it. This will probably be understood by people who can get to view all that brit/brat awards nonsense prima donna rock stars showing off how many awards they can get great for record sales doesnt mean your musics any good though. But then again most of the people on this list are trying to promote something.