 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)kei9 recycle ...and 115 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2618565 Today 4 Topics 127845 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
simultaneously sad and hilarious that this reads exactly like the history of anyone else into this stuff. i'll use my own for the sake of example: i was a rather ham-fisted keyboard player and being able to play back things on the computer immediately made a huge difference. i hated notation, though, and so i switched from performer to cakewalk to fruity loops but when i tried to load up the piano roll in cakewalk the software would crash, it was really irritating |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
last i left software music, i wanted so much to have ableton's "performance" view carefully extracted and glued into cubase so i could have the whambam that ableton does with non-linear editing usable by someone not on cocaine. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah your right, whats great also is that infocom call him on the phone mid interview |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
is albeton anygood, it looks like something that people who are interested in music would use but without going the full hog |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
...and, yes, i did try using ReWire for that, but the program crashes if you try to use that part of it. that's the kind of program it is at the moment, but i don't want to do them down, because i know that it's in a fever of re-writing, and they keep on sending out newer and newer versions to the IRC XDCC bots in #musicwarez |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
imagine a hyperactive, nerdy teenage kid who spends his lunch break in guitar center discovering it was possible to download synths off the internet. it was so cruel to me that the Access Virus was available as a plugin, but it was TDM and hardware-only.... i think there's also a Propet VS TDM.... dicks |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
so, sorry, i'm not sure what you mean by "but without going the full hog" |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sorry yeah what i mean is it looks user friendly, too user friendly sort of |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if you'll compromise and hear of a terrifying machine that consumes hogs by the truckload, however, i'm your man |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ableton live is aptly named. it's not called ableton edit. it's good for live midi routing, audio mashing/stretching, loop munging. it's what you want on the other end of your 8x8 grid of square buttons as you do your daedaelest on cocaine. that's the view in ableton with all the tracks going vertical. press tab, and you go over to the "arrangement view." this is pretty much designed so you can chop up stuff and drag it around live, on stage, also on cocaine. anyways, the "performance view" is great fun to riff around with. once you get to know it, it's a faster way of doing many things. faster than any other bit of software i have... then, though, i want to take a live jam that's vaguely what i want and carefully edit down the mess into what i actually want. the "arrangement view" is not designed for this. cubase is. the two pieces of 'ware should talk, but don't. the program crashes if i try to use that part of it is it what you want? i dunno. torrent it and find out. or maybe bitwig studio. anyone tried that? does it program crash? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ah yeah, this is what i thought it was for, tanks for description |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
whenever i type up something like that it loads the nuances into my mind and the nuances generate nuances. peter molyneux as a funcional concept generator... just, you know, remember to get out before it expands to the whole stack and your thread segfaults. point being: this is one of those fractal patterns. the journey and roadblocks "douglad adams" describes are just uncannily similar to my own story. probably similar to the story of anyone who's into synths 'n seqs. adams was doing this stuff ten years before me, and it feels like fill in the blank. the problems, his solutions. one software has this, the other has that... they should work together, but... it gets even crazier. i started on digital performer, which is what adams landed on... and then i switched to cakewalk, but left that because i hated staff notation; preferred piano roll.... it gives me this sense that i could sit down and explicitly chart all of it out and find out where one is apt to get stuck in a loop of technical goulash and lose sight of the music, so to speak. it is very reminiscent of that thing where you wind up fiddling with the same two-bar loop for four hours straight. vibert said, in some interview, he's seen aphex get stuck in that same loop himself. it's one of those things that's simply human nature -- we all have moments when we get so lasered in on what we're doing that we lose perspective. chris vrenna said he has approximately 37 different kinds of distortion and he avoids fussing over the nuances because it'd drive him insane and he'd never get the real work done... the overabundance of options makes it easy to get lost. so, yes, there's a really deep and satisfying moment of, "huh... i could probably flowchart this all out and debug it..." and i love the sound of my fingers typing; my pleasure to reply |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
so, yes: dear douglad adams. younger, backwards in time. less dead. you should ditch digital performer for cakewalk, because it will do the things you want without program crashing. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
only after i post the above does it dawn on me that "cakewalk" is also a carnival game that involves walking in a loop. to music. rad. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
how the fuck is notation related to anything pretty certain stepsequencers were the reason for all that mental music we all listen to!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Wkd link cheers Hyperflake |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
dear younger Douglad, don't get on that fuckin treadmill |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
douglad adams stated that he felt most comfortable sequencing with classical notation -- staff notation. i stated that i found "staff notation" suffocating and the "piano roll" style was what i wanted. completely opposite preferences, yes? then this: i dumped cakewalk as a sequencer because it was geared towards "staff notation." then the familiar grind: digital performer? cakewalk? pro tools? renoise? cubase? all of them have slightly different angles. different features and problems. anyone getting into electronic music production has to wade through this mess of options and get it wrong a few times before it starts to go alright. i read this archived article and said to myself: douglas adams wants cakewalk! too bad i can't tell him! that's a bit amusing, right? but, what interests me more is how everyone in electronic music has to crawl through this mess. one guy wants piano roll, the other wants staff notation. then one sequencer is supposed to do both, but crashes when you do one 'em... then i ask you -- steve mcqueen -- what if we were to sit down and chart it all out? could we perhaps work out a way to get all newcomers through that minefield faster? even if you have little success with that, working through that decision field will land you on some deep revelations about production 'n' process, right? or maybe you still don't get it. perhaps it'd make more sense if i said it like, "everyone who learns to sing has certain problems eventually, no matter who they are, so let's write them down and try to see what it says about the architecture of learning to sing." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
writing that was enough to get me thinking: piano roll, staff notation, step sequencer, tracker... are these all getting at the same thing, even? i used trackers exclusively for a stage, and i've barely used them since. they are fantastic for the same reason venetian snares is a fantastic name. drag your fingers down a stucco wall and connect the larger bumps with drum noises in your mind. this is the sort of thing i'll do when i'm bored, and sometimes it'd give me a good idea for a "sequence." just, like, yeah, that's a good drum thing, let's go do that... though weird, i figure that makes sense enough. what's strange is that i have a lot more trouble doing that horizontally. my brain most easily maps the bumps to the samples when i drag straight downwards. i can do any direction, really, but i have to take a moment to orient myself. it reminds me very much of every time i've contorted and twisted to reach into some equipment rack, or hung upside down by my knees to adjust something i can't reach any other way. i have to take a moment to visualize what i want to do. is that still counter-clockwise when i'm hanging upside-down into a server rack? does this question even make sense? i'd have to visualize it to tell you... trackers are vertical. up to down. they are for rhythm. piano rolls are horizontal. left to right. they are for melody and harmony..... perhaps. i'm just letting it free-run into deep goulash. is a sequencer that only accepts staff notation still a sequencer? is a tracker a sequencer? what is a sequencer? it's poorly defined. some people want a staff, some people want a step seq, and a word like sequencer is the eris in your apple, wasting all your time, as you say: well, digital performer should do staff notation, but the program crashes when you use that bit... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
out on the porch, smoking a zigguraut, still chewing on this. if you're j. average caveman, out of control, sliding down a muddy slope, grabbing for something to stop the slide... well, yes, the brain has probably evolved to deal with rhythmic pulses rather quickly, in this context. then, horizontal? feeling your way along a cliff face in the dark. knowing it by touch, unable to see, poking your way along according to a memorized progression... i have no idea if i'm on to something with that or not. it's item one of a zillion this line of questioning could have me into. it's a good thread to tug at, pretty much. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
why? why care? adams spent a presumably significant quanity of time wading through all this muck just to get to the music he wanted to write. if he hadn't had to spend so much time on that, perhaps we'd have gotten two or three albums out of him we didn't. the guy who wrote hitchikers guide... yeah, two or three albums that could have been from him, deleted from reality. because we didn't have our shit together. now he's dead. and this situation is actively repeating itself over and over, over the whole planet. until it gets fixed. as a software engineer, i take this sort of mess pretty personally, because i feel i'm at least somewhat in a position to do something about it. until it explodes in O(n), anyways... "wow, this is a bit of a big topic. how much can i do myself? how much am i obligated to do? what's realistic?" when i get lost in the math of a question i didn't have on my agenda, i turn the "leechblock" plugin back on and quit xltronic until i do the things i am supposed to do. because i can't debug the obnoxiously shitty architecture of electronic music metaphors if the bills are unpaid and the dog needs walkies |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Cheers Glad you found it interesting! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
