Music Forum / Playing on you're instrument

you can't improvise on computers, you can't be impromtu, express your personality, etc.

wrong.

Let's see, I suck at DJ'ing, and I sorta suck at guitar - I'm a singer, a "growling" singer....

prove it, chauncey. Prove that computers can give you the same amount of control over the sound as an acoustic instrument.

And you know, just because photoshop exists doesn't mean everyone is going to put down their brush...

We're getting to the stage where nearly EVERYTHING will be replaced by some kind of computer. Personally, NO computer can make a better sound than ANY accoustic instrument (well, maybe not the Recorder - damn things, I'mm break EVERY SINGLE ONE I CAN FIND DAMMIT)

Musical instruments will always be relevant just like film and paint and canvas. There's an organic element which cannot be simulated. Certainly computers are already changing the way we think about music. Sythesizers and drum machines are just the beginning. There are already musicians whose only instrument is a computer and a keyboard. But to say that one day other instruments won't exist seems to take a very one sided view towards technological progress. Some people will always prefer a more organic, tactile approach to music afforded through real brass or wood instruments. Maybe one day the majority will be using computers, I could see that. But sometimes imperfection is an important quality in art (especially in Japanese culture) and rather than trying to simulate fret buzz and feedback and variations in tonal quality, it's preferable just to pick up a real guitar and all of the organic qualities that come with it.

wrong.

let's see you do a jazz solo. no practice, all spontaneous. all happening at once, no writing. no imput of notes. just you and the "instrument." personally, i cant become one with a computer, and that's what you have to do to play "real" music.

a program like Logic, or Reason, requires that you "input" notes, through the same form of key-board found on a piano, or organ. you have all of the same freedom as you would with any of those instruments, and with modern technology, you even have the same basic control of the notes.

the only difference is that it can create more sounds, and it "records" what you're doing, so that you can edit your take, and edit the sounds of the instrument, etc, after you've already played it. this grants you more, not less, control over the instrument.

in theory, then, i could play you a jazz solo (unless they don't have piano in jazz, which is, of course, not the case), but it would suck, becuase i suck. anyways...

please, stop using the "organic sounds better" argument, becuase, the majority of you already are using electronic instruments, and becuase i disagree. i've loved the sound of a synthisizer (which is all a computer is), since i can remember, and i cannot stand the sound a non-treated acoustic instrument gives, with two exceptions: piano, vibraphone. even those sound better drenched in reverb, with a nice bit of tremelo added for fun.

yuppy, yuppy, yuppy.

My friends and I had this idea for a computer performance interface the other night. Imagine a virtual scene in which the performer is placed, wearing motion sensors on the arms and goggles to give him a first-person view of the scene. In front of him is a vast array of pads or zones, which when "struck" or "approached" with the performer's virtual extremities will either make a sound or modify other sounds in some way. I'm not talking about triggering samples, but molding a synthetic sound through changes in pitch, volume and timbre. A virtual theremin, if you will, except the interface is limitless and can change in any way at any time.

The entire scene (from a third-person perspective) can then be projected on a screen behind the performer to provide the listener/viewer with an added dimension to the experience.

I think I could manage the software. The hardware might be pricey, though. Maybe I could get an NEA grant!

please, stop using the "organic sounds better" argument, becuase, the majority of you already are using electronic instruments, and becuase i disagree. i've loved the sound of a synthisizer (which is all a computer is), since i can remember, and i cannot stand the sound a non-treated acoustic instrument gives, with two exceptions: piano, vibraphone. even those sound better drenched in reverb, with a nice bit of tremelo added for fun.

yuppy, yuppy, yuppy.

I did not use the organic sounds better argument. I said some people prefer an organic element in their music and those people will keep traditional instruments alive even if the majority switches to computers and synthesizers. You're talking about technological progress as if it's one big single minded movement of all people in one direction. This is hardly the case. Some people will prefer the greater control of computer based music and others will not.

Actually, it's you who's using the "organic sounds better" argument in a way by saying that computers sound better and therefore they will one day replace other instruments entirely. The principle of these arguments is the same: that one preference is better than the others and so will one day eclipse the other. I'm arguing that both will continue to exist even if one day computers are more prominent than traditional instruments. Because despite the advantages of all digital technology, it will never be able to fully simulate an organic sound. It's a theoretical impossibility. That doesn't make organic better, just different.

It's the whole Romantic (acoustic/traditional) vs. Classical (computers, etc.) thing again...

forget I bothered.

Music is what you take it as... and I for one cannot force myself to take to much of the "Classical" genre, if you will, as music.

I did not use the organic sounds better argument. I said some people prefer an organic element in their music and those people will keep traditional instruments alive even if the majority switches to computers and synthesizers. You're talking about technological progress as if it's one big single minded movement of all people in one direction. This is hardly the case. Some people will prefer the greater control of computer based music and others will not.

Actually, it's you who's using the "organic sounds better" argument in a way by saying that computers sound better and therefore they will one day replace other instruments entirely. The principle of these arguments is the same: that one preference is better than the others and so will one day eclipse the other. I'm arguing that both will continue to exist even if one day computers are more prominent than traditional instruments. Because despite the advantages of all digital technology, it will never be able to fully simulate an organic sound. It's a theoretical impossibility. That doesn't make organic better, just different.

1) i wasn't even talking to you, or about you.

2) i didn't say computers sounded better, i said i thought they sounded better. and i didn't say they'd replace other instruments because they sounded better, i said they'd replace other instruments because that's the direction music is presently moving into, regardless of genre. and it is.

classical, country, folk, jazz, blues? eh?

I must be missing something, cg?, but some genres you need to exclude.

what are you talking about?

Classical: has been using electronic instruments since the 1950's (and computers since, well, since it became possible to do so)!

Country / Folk: ever heard of "folktronica"? it's a whole fucking genre dedicated to electronic instruments (including computers) within a folk context.

Jazz: Acid Jazz? Thirsty Ear's "Blue Series"? just about everything on "smooth-jazz" radio? ring a bell? or three? all make heavy usage of electronics (including, once again, computers).

Blues: is dead. thank god...

Blues: is dead. thank god...

I believe the North Mississippi All-Stars are considered blues. Or blues rock anyway. They use electronic instruments.

It also helps that blues isn't dead.

I play drums, and a little guitar. mainly drums though.

on the computers v. acoustic issue, computers open different doors than an acoustic instrument does, and vise-versa. Computers alow extremes and effects imposible to an acoustic instrument, yet the tone and emotion of an acoustic gives a different feel that a computer couldn't replicate.

it's all relative

I play guitar and some bass.

I made a nice bass riff on Fruity Loops. It's... nice.

I play the saxophone, guitar, and I just started piano. I plan to start learnign the bagpipes in the near future too.