|
"boring techno music" is really easy with modern tools
|
View this Thread in Original format
| VDub |
This is why I'm conflicted about this...
Firstly, this "sound" and methodology is the most retarded I've ever heard...
HOWEVER.....
It makes me think of the Detroit boys pioneering our sound with the Roland 303 in the 80's... |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Never ceases to amaze how ignorant the mass media STILL is about computers and "code". To a reporter, computer code is like a direct translation to a different language or a series of magic incantations. To people who actually know what they're talking about, the only really hard part is figuring out what the code is supposed to do.
This stuff vaguely resembles actual programming, but to me it's more like a confusing and convoluted text-based interface to do the exact same things that modern sequencers already have a much more efficient GUI for.
It's like writing a Photoshop script (ExtendScript) to do your latest "chop" instead of just... doing the chop. Sure, you can do it, but the only reason why you would is (a) you need to perform exactly the same steps on several different images, or (b) you're trying to impress people who don't know how any better and don't realize how much effort is being wasted.
I rate this half a thumb up for the geek factor. If they want more than that, they'll have to prove that they can do things with this that can't already be done in a plain-vanilla sequencer and maybe a plugin like Reaktor or Kyma. |
|
|
| gl.tch |
Geez guys!
Why hate on someone's interface innovation? It's about performance not replacing your soft synths or hardware.... |
|
|
| kaniz |
| quote: | Originally posted by VDub
This is why I'm conflicted about this...
Firstly, this "sound" and methodology is the most retarded I've ever heard...
HOWEVER.....
It makes me think of the Detroit boys pioneering our sound with the Roland 303 in the 80's... |
Why is it restarted? Cant watch the video at work to see/hear what this "sounds" like - but I find the methodology interesting.
Then again, I am a computer geek coming from a programming background.
I find the idea of programming music / generative music / etc to be pretty interesting idea. Manipulating objects at a very basic level to produce the sounds that you want / using algorithms / etc.
The problem I tend to have with generative music though, is that it tends to fall into two extremes of either too rigid and structured, or noise that is simply random.
One program I've fiddled with that I thought was neat is Nodal, it's like designing music on graph paper - you start with a node, then link the nodes together. The screen is divided into a grid, the distance between nodes along the grid indicated time, and you could have events trigger every X time it was hit, have paths split, increase the value from the previous node/etc.
Starting with a simple 4/4 loop and building off branches/paths and tweaking it to produce 'live' music in this manner was kind of neat - and you could start to form rhythms/melodies with it, despite it being largely generative music.
I think given the amount of technology and tools that we have today - stuff like this is pretty interesting. Instead of relying on fancy GUI, pretty faders, Lemurs and other multi-touch devices - it gets you into the guts of what those interfaces are manipulating for you.
While I may not always like the output - I do find it interesting. |
|
|
| afroBass |
| quote: | Originally posted by VDub
This is why I'm conflicted about this...
Firstly, this "sound" and methodology is the most retarded I've ever heard...
HOWEVER.....
It makes me think of the Detroit boys pioneering our sound with the Roland 303 in the 80's... |
if you asked today's techno fans back in the 80's what they thought of the sound, a large number of them would have probably totally hated it. although over time certain sounds begin to get appreciated by a larger audience. same with this stuff - im not saying these guys have it all right, but it could spark some minds to improve on their ideas which allow more spontaneity during a gig where you would be producing live.
although i dont get why they would want to go backwards with technology rather than allowing computers to do some of the work for you. its like owning windows xp but choosing to use windows 95 just to prove that you can do it.. |
|
|
|
|
