(no subject)
I checked in for the first half of a hoedown with folks from both the Columbia and Princeton Electronic music labs, at a would-be dive called Tank in Tribeca.
I only managed to stay for the first 3 pieces, due to the lateness of the hour and my inability to stand for another hour, but the great part is I really enjoyed all 3, and that's never a given at a "computer music" concert (or a free form mashup as they called it).
I especially enjoyed the duet of Dan Trueman and Brad Garton on violin and laptop. I also did not have the personal dissonance of approach that I had with the other two pieces.
That's not a criticism of the other two pieces, but it all takes some explaining. I've got the sense it's partially a generational thing, not that my sample set is enough to show it. It is my personal reaction to the performance tools chosen, and strictly that. Aside from a very few high volume high frequency tones, I found the sounds enjoyable and stimulating.
At 52, I believe I was the oldest there. Garton is almost my age (may he live to 120), and Trueman I don't know but I think closer to my age than anyone else. I suspect everyone else was under 30 if not under 25.
The other two composer-performers worked real time with a multitude of analog and analog/digital devices and controllers. I'm guessing this is similar to the fascination I've seen from younger guitar players for using tube amps and effects. It's no longer just old junk for the poor, and that 60 Hz hum is a feature, not a bug.
The first (whose name I missed, I am sorry to say) worked with a pen tablet and what I believe was a box of filters and oscillators - basically, a small subtractive synth in the style of Moog, Buchla, PAiA or Arp. He stared at the laptop screen, made little motions on the tablet, and constantly moved from knob to knob to evolve a soundscape I found very engaging - though I was a bit embarrassed to realize at the end that the rhythm I had perceived under it all was actually a noisy sound system. Well, that stochastic for you, I guess!
Dan and Brad's setup was minimal by comparison. Obviously one generator was the violin Dan played. Brad simply had a laptop, and did all his playing, appearing very relaxed, through the traditional interface of teletype keyboard and mouse.
I fear I really can't describe the piece. It was flowing, peaceful, coherent - all good things. Mostly I just dug it. I am curious if there were other generators besides the violin on the laptop, or if the laptop worked entirely with the violin for initial signal.
The third - I believe it was Set Cluet - worked with a broad array of devices. One seemed to be a battery operated toothbrush or something, which acted as a noise source and possibly a modulator. Something that looked like a walkman what went into or near his mouth several time - I'm guessing it was a input device and possible for looping. And a cigar box with stuff in it that reacted to things near it, or to the capacitance of his hands touching it in certain ways.
The sounds were good, I enjoyed. Personally distracted by the cigar box, because it reminded me of my old PAiA analog synth that was so sensitive to fields around it that it was considered worthless by most. Me, I had fun making it change sounds by touching it or playing theraminlike. In the end, the PAiA hit the trash. Too bad, because these younger musicians have some common cultural agreement (post punk?) that defective gear can be great stuff.
The distraction for me, again, isn't criticism, it was more envy that this was taken seriously now.
I am going to suggest that Brad and Dan's simpler hardware setup - violin into laptop and out - has something to do with age. I suspect like me they played with a lot of temperamental hardware over the years (I know Brad did, with that original A/D/A converter). Oscillators that drift, noisy patch cords, etc. So for them, getting a clean setup of "get the violin into the laptop and work with it all there" is very clean and satisfying, and helps get a great deal of physical reality out of the way by putting it in software.
Whereas for folks half my age, who did not spend their teen years trash picking broken tape recorders to create crude effects find all this old junk pretty interesting - much like I enjoy my 1941 Plymouth. These people were born after the MIDI standard was created! After PacMan was already a has been! They've have digital devices all their post-toddler life.
How fascinating it must be to turn to these physical devices and do real time manipulation - the very thing *I* want to be rid of in electronic music. (I did a piece using a Mattel PowerGlove some years back - didn't like it. Just threw it away not long ago. Bet it AND the PAiA could have found new homes).
In my dotage I turned heavily to real time gesture as well, but in my case, it was learning to play acoustic instruments. Mostly. My fascination with Brad's work is that he is working all on the laptop with the acoustic input, and getting beautiful results. I'm busy enough building wooden instruments (acoustic and electric), I don't want to circuit bend in real metal, I want to do it in software. I've done some work with my electric tsimbaly running into a nice bit of code called "Audio Mulch" that I won't even attempt to describe. Last nights program motivates me to go figure out what else I can do, now that I've mostly sorted out my input issues.
Meantime, maybe I'll run over to Sam Ash and see if they have the Mel Bay Laptop Method.
I only managed to stay for the first 3 pieces, due to the lateness of the hour and my inability to stand for another hour, but the great part is I really enjoyed all 3, and that's never a given at a "computer music" concert (or a free form mashup as they called it).
I especially enjoyed the duet of Dan Trueman and Brad Garton on violin and laptop. I also did not have the personal dissonance of approach that I had with the other two pieces.
That's not a criticism of the other two pieces, but it all takes some explaining. I've got the sense it's partially a generational thing, not that my sample set is enough to show it. It is my personal reaction to the performance tools chosen, and strictly that. Aside from a very few high volume high frequency tones, I found the sounds enjoyable and stimulating.
At 52, I believe I was the oldest there. Garton is almost my age (may he live to 120), and Trueman I don't know but I think closer to my age than anyone else. I suspect everyone else was under 30 if not under 25.
The other two composer-performers worked real time with a multitude of analog and analog/digital devices and controllers. I'm guessing this is similar to the fascination I've seen from younger guitar players for using tube amps and effects. It's no longer just old junk for the poor, and that 60 Hz hum is a feature, not a bug.
The first (whose name I missed, I am sorry to say) worked with a pen tablet and what I believe was a box of filters and oscillators - basically, a small subtractive synth in the style of Moog, Buchla, PAiA or Arp. He stared at the laptop screen, made little motions on the tablet, and constantly moved from knob to knob to evolve a soundscape I found very engaging - though I was a bit embarrassed to realize at the end that the rhythm I had perceived under it all was actually a noisy sound system. Well, that stochastic for you, I guess!
Dan and Brad's setup was minimal by comparison. Obviously one generator was the violin Dan played. Brad simply had a laptop, and did all his playing, appearing very relaxed, through the traditional interface of teletype keyboard and mouse.
I fear I really can't describe the piece. It was flowing, peaceful, coherent - all good things. Mostly I just dug it. I am curious if there were other generators besides the violin on the laptop, or if the laptop worked entirely with the violin for initial signal.
The third - I believe it was Set Cluet - worked with a broad array of devices. One seemed to be a battery operated toothbrush or something, which acted as a noise source and possibly a modulator. Something that looked like a walkman what went into or near his mouth several time - I'm guessing it was a input device and possible for looping. And a cigar box with stuff in it that reacted to things near it, or to the capacitance of his hands touching it in certain ways.
The sounds were good, I enjoyed. Personally distracted by the cigar box, because it reminded me of my old PAiA analog synth that was so sensitive to fields around it that it was considered worthless by most. Me, I had fun making it change sounds by touching it or playing theraminlike. In the end, the PAiA hit the trash. Too bad, because these younger musicians have some common cultural agreement (post punk?) that defective gear can be great stuff.
The distraction for me, again, isn't criticism, it was more envy that this was taken seriously now.
I am going to suggest that Brad and Dan's simpler hardware setup - violin into laptop and out - has something to do with age. I suspect like me they played with a lot of temperamental hardware over the years (I know Brad did, with that original A/D/A converter). Oscillators that drift, noisy patch cords, etc. So for them, getting a clean setup of "get the violin into the laptop and work with it all there" is very clean and satisfying, and helps get a great deal of physical reality out of the way by putting it in software.
Whereas for folks half my age, who did not spend their teen years trash picking broken tape recorders to create crude effects find all this old junk pretty interesting - much like I enjoy my 1941 Plymouth. These people were born after the MIDI standard was created! After PacMan was already a has been! They've have digital devices all their post-toddler life.
How fascinating it must be to turn to these physical devices and do real time manipulation - the very thing *I* want to be rid of in electronic music. (I did a piece using a Mattel PowerGlove some years back - didn't like it. Just threw it away not long ago. Bet it AND the PAiA could have found new homes).
In my dotage I turned heavily to real time gesture as well, but in my case, it was learning to play acoustic instruments. Mostly. My fascination with Brad's work is that he is working all on the laptop with the acoustic input, and getting beautiful results. I'm busy enough building wooden instruments (acoustic and electric), I don't want to circuit bend in real metal, I want to do it in software. I've done some work with my electric tsimbaly running into a nice bit of code called "Audio Mulch" that I won't even attempt to describe. Last nights program motivates me to go figure out what else I can do, now that I've mostly sorted out my input issues.
Meantime, maybe I'll run over to Sam Ash and see if they have the Mel Bay Laptop Method.