In the introduction to his book 'Makers', Cory Doctorow explains why he is providing electronic versions of the book gratis.
"Why am I doing this? Because my problem isn't piracy, it's obscurity (thanks, @timeoreilly for this awesome aphorism)."
Cory, thanks for that laugh. Best one I had all week. You? Obscure? I guess it is all relative. You're not Paris Hilton famous. However, I don't read boingboing any more because of you. You pimping your books. All the time. Even the most tenuous connection... "Oh yes, that person had feet. You know who else had feet? One of the characters in my book, 'Little Brother' which can be purchased at..."
Next time you feel the need to leverage the mighty resources you have available to publicize your book, just, don't. Show some self-restraint, or, better yet, use the opportunity to promote some other deserving writer who doesn't have the same resources you do.
The Ricardo Villalobos post on CDM caused quite the uproar. I read a the interview in its entirety, and it looks like the two choice quotes were already extracted. In context, they don't jump out at me like they did in Peter's write up. Basically, he's saying that technology A sounds better than technology B. It is really odd to hear an electronic musician argue for an arbitrary division of good and bad based on what technology was used because, historically, we've struggled with other people making the same argument to us since, well, forever.
This same argument blossomed in various flavors over the years. Mixing in the box vs. mixing on a console. Analog recording vs. digital recording. Analog modeling vs. analog. Electric guitars were not considered 'real' musical instruments because they required amplification, and so on. Any musical instrument except for the human voice is a product of technology. Some good points have been made about the strong and weak points of various technologies, but ultimately, it comes down to how we choose to use them.
I watched 'Up' last night. I don't think Pixar has ever made a bad film. I was skeptical of the premises of the last three films (Ratatouille, Wall E, Up), but I think they've turned out to be some of the best work Pixar has ever done.
Pixar realizes that they're specializing in a technical field - movies made entirely inside a computer - and that high tech gloss fades over time. Therefore, if you want your work to stand the test of time, there has to be something more than the technology at the core of your art. Pixar has consistently excelled at the fundamentals of good film. Good story, strong characters, endearing performances, cracking script, etc, etc... Arguably, Pixar does a better job at the fundamentals than normal Hollywood films.
It is easy to be blinded by technology, to be satisfied by the technical gloss, but this is fleeting. For your music to be truly great, it must have strong fundamentals, or else it is an empty shell. We can blog and discuss technical issues because we can. Specifications are concrete. Blog posts tend to be product-driven. It is far more difficult to talk about the underlying artistic principles. This leads to a lot of blah blah blah about bit depth, mixing engines, SMT vs. thru hole, analog to digital conversion, frequency response and so on, but it seems absurd to be obsessing about this minutia when the underlying music is cardiologically bankrupt.
I'm one of the lucky few beta testers of the new TipTop Audio Z-DSP eurorack module, and boy is it a lot of fun. The Z-DSP is a lot like the TipTop Audio Z5000, except embiggened. A lot. There are three CV controlled parameters per program. There is a feedback loop that you can tap into on the front panel so you can insert a filter or whatever module you can think of inside a part of the DSP process that is usually closed to tinkering. You can change the personality of the DSP by inserting a different card on the front panel. You can even voltage control the clock. This is serious sound-mangling mayhem.
The short audio files I produced represent only one patch idea using one program on one card on this module. I could spend a great deal of time exploring various options without even changing the DSP program on the Z-DSP. The fact that I could load another program is another whole world of possibilities. If, somehow you got bored of that, you can load a card with a different batch of programs. Egads, this thing is endless.
I used three TipTop Z3000 oscillators to perform some additive synthesis, using triangle waves, as I wanted a few extra harmonics in there. The mixed output went into a Cwejman RES-4 filter, with the frequencies of all the filters modulated by a Cwejman VCO-6. This is what I fed into the Z-DSP. I inserted the Elby Synthacon filter into the Z-DSP's feedback loop and controlled the feedback with a joystick. I recorded the output, and played with the joystick, audio input on the Z-DSP and filter settings in real time. The Synthacon filter is interesting as I can selectively bring low pass, band pass, and high pass variations into the feedback loop whenever I want. This was interesting to control as feedback loops can be very unstable, but this always seems to be easier to 'feel' in the analog domain.
I made another pass using the stepped output from the VCO-6 and played with that for a while. These are creative commons license, so feel free to download and use yourself if you like.
Next is the drum pattern. I started with a stock BPM pattern, then I edited the pattern slightly, then I edited the sounds. The next clip demonstrates the progression of results.
Lazily recorded a bass line using the Prophet 5. I wasn't too concerned about mistakes as I intended to edit the snot out of the recorded audio in the DAW.
My son is really attracted to foosball tables, and, if I'm honest, I'd have to say I am too. I considered the idea of buying a small, tabletop unit, but I was unsure how much use it'd see. I was afraid it might become one of those things you play with for a bit, then collect dust. Once again, I see a solution in the form of Lego.
I personally prefer the design and building stage, and my son enjoyed that too, but he REALLY enjoys playing with it and now insists we play a couple matches every night. While I'm not the first person to build a Lego Foosball table, it is always interesting to see other people's take on a similar idea - especially when you're constrained by whatever Lego elements you have available. I found prettier examples online, but the design I came up with is functional and fun to play.
I edited the video together and again noticed it needed a background audio track. I always seem to figure this out too late. Anyway, I threw together some beats from BPM, an old ambient track from 'music for two cd players' and some vowel filter fun from FAW's Circle. Shake and bake.
4) Cats don't care about your feelings. If you ask a cat's opinion of your work, they're universally unimpressed, Try harder. (Note: if you're actually seeking a cat's opinion about your work, please consult a doctor immediately)
5) Cats enforce periodic work breaks, thus reducing the risk of repetitive stress injuries.
6) Cats are continuously plotting your demise, which should remind you of your own mortality, which serves as a motivating factor. Hurry up and make music while you can, because you'll be dead soon.
7) Serendipity. Cats are like a furry, mobile deck of oblique strategies.
Everyone is talking about the eigenharp. What do I think of an eigenharp? It is a combination of a monome, french connection and warr guitar, all of which I play. It is a monome due to the button grid and LEDs. It is a French Connection (or a Haken Continuum, which would be a better example) due to the multiple vectors of expression under an individual note. It is a Warr Guitar because it looks and feels very similar on stage.
So, yeah, sure, I'm interested. I want to play it. I want to develop software for it. I've also been clamoring for controllers with more expression. This is what will drive electronic music forward. The torrent of data flooding out of this instrument must be unbelievable.
I realized that if you're going to make electronic music, and want to stand the test of time, it all comes down to the performance. The kinds of sounds that work well with a high-bandwidth controller are simpler, relying on the physical input of the musician. Based on the Sonic State interview (embed below), it sounds like they came to the same conclusion I did. Overly complex sounds obscure the expression coming from the instrument.
It seems clear to me the really interesting technology here are the keys themselves. How about a piano keyboard layout using this technology? I would love a keyboard controller that allows me to manually articulate amplitude and vibrato polyphonically on individual keys. The Continuum can get you there, but the eigenharp keys are real, physical things that you can actually wiggle. The down side is you can't slide into notes the way you can on the Continuum. There may be ways to approach this technique on the discrete-button eigenharp, but the Continuum will be naturally better at this.
Physical instrument modeling is obviously a natural fit for the eigenharp. I personally feel that modeling existing instruments is only a starting point. I'm far more interested in modeling things that have no real-world analog. Playing a realistic-sounding clarinet on the eigenharp is a good demonstration, but under what circumstances is that actually better than recording a real clarinet? Also, electric guitar patches are never, EVER a good idea, even ironically.
It sounds like a lot of software development went into the eigenharp, and it shows. I wonder what would have happened if they developed the hardware and threw the software development out to the community? I guess there is a big difference between a community of people around a $450 device and a community of people around a $8000 device. If you're spending that much money, you probably just want to play the damn thing and not sit coding stuff for it. On the other hand, how much of the price of the Alpha is represents software development? Would it have been out sooner?
Bravo for understanding that our existence on the planet is temporary, and it might be a good idea to ensure that the eigenharp will continue to function in the future by making the software open source.
The musical examples I've seen left me underwhelmed, though. If you subtract out being wowed by the technology, I wasn't left with much. The audience wants to understand the direct relationship between the performer and the sound that is produced. After that is established, then the technology fades and the experience becomes entirely about the music and performance. So I found myself asking, "What kind of music can ONLY be made on the eigenharp?" and "Is this actually better?" and "Do I like this?" I can see a role for an eigenharp player in certain contexts, but I don't believe I want to see an entire ensemble of eigenharps.
Good demos may be a matter of time. This is what I consider a great controller demo:
Note to Haken: make your product videos easier to embed. Hint. Hint.
Here are a few things I'd like to see. They may be addressed already, or in the discussion phase, but I'll just put my prejudices out there:
Native OpenSound Control support
Allow developers access full access to the behavior of the LEDs decoupled from the button presses. Based on the different software demonstrations, I'm pretty sure this is possible, but I wonder if this could all be done via an open protocol like OSC, or if this access is wrapped up in a different development layer.
Direct CV output. John Henry Lambert mentioned something about the development of this capability. The implementation may be a bit tricky. I'm imagining several possible paths. Should be interesting. Maybe a four note polyphonic output box similar to the Continuum CVC would work.
I'm not interested in the Pico. The buttons are super interesting, but 18 keys does not do it for me. The Alpha has potential, but this isn't something I'd ever be able to afford. Still, it'd be fun to borrow one for a while and make some videos.
The estimable Dr. David Lovelace, Esq. is busily pooting out a regular web comic based on his cute, adorable, and often bloody rodent characters. As both a fan of his work, and falling-safe humor in general, I recommend you become a regular visitor to Hamsterdunce. Even rock-stars like Dave could use your support.
@redvoid asked some questions about the mechanics of Error Correction, and then sent a nice tweet (thanks!) so I figured I'd follow up with a blog post since it turned out somewhat lengthy.
First, a few comments about gate signals, trigger signals and clock dividers in an analog modular, then I'll talk a little about analog sequencers.
Gate signals are just what they sound like. When you press a key on a keyboard, the voltage goes high. When you release a key, the voltage goes low. This signal is usually used to trigger an envelope. On key down, the input gate signal goes high and the envelope goes through the attack and decay stages. The envelope stays at the 'sustain' level of the ADSR until the gate voltage goes low, at which point the envelope proceeds to the drop down to zero from the sustain level at a rate indicated by the 'release' segment of the envelope.
You could use a gate signal to directly control a VCA (an 'organ'-like gate), but the sudden voltage change usually results in clicks. Best to soften the attacks and releases with an envelope or lag processor.
Triggers are like gate signals that disregard note off. They're really short little blips - gate goes high then drops to zero promptly. Sort of like a 'bang' message in Max. These are good for triggering drum sounds or for times when you want to control envelope contour via external modulation sources or some other means.
Clock dividers take a clock signal, which itself is a series of pulses, and output a multiple of the input. LIke, we may get a clock signal at 96 pulses per quarter and divide that down so we get one pulse per 16th note. Or, maybe we just want to trigger something every eight pulses. Clock dividers are important when integrating other gear (like a drum machine) with your modular, or if you're really serious about completely-analog sequencing or self-playing patches/compositions and you need to manage, distribute, change and play with events occurring totally within the analog realm. This is where you'll find use for other 'analog computing' logic modules.
I'm kind of a strange bird when it comes to modulars and sequencers. I like hardware sequencers, but I'm not a fan of hardware (analog) sequencers with memory. Adding memory just mucks everything up, in my opinion. I understand and appreciate the impulse, and the thought process leading to the goal, but, in the end, the implementation seems to take everything away from what I like about analog sequencing to begin with, and you're back in the land of LCD menus and knobs that take on multiple functions and so on. So, when it comes to through-composed sequencing of actual notes, I prefer to use a computer. When it comes to hands-on creation of cyclical, nested modulation sources, I prefer analog sequencers. Currently, I'm using a pair of Doepfer A-155 modules. In the past, I used two Fat Controllers, but they're a bit bulky and require external power supplies and such, so I switched over to the A-155s. Numerology occupies a point between - offering an unlimited modular step sequencing environment, albeit, one involving a computer.
To be fair, sequencing analog from a computer in the past resulted in awful timing, sending MIDI notes out a MIDI interface, then through a MIDI to CV box and the additional latency and jitter, but Volta solved all of that for me. Also, due to the multiple step sequencers built-in to Volta, I find I'm using the A-155s not so much these days, either.
Repetition breeds familiarity which people seem to enjoy in the short term, but this leads to the music having a short shelf life. If a piece of music is too repetitive, it doesn't stand up to repeated listenings very well. If there isn't enough, the the music tends to be a bit dense and without any mechanism for the audience to latch onto. So, a balance needs to be struck, depending on your goals. If you're going to repeat something, some small bit of the repetition needs to be altered to sustain interest. There are many ways to do this, sometimes I'll add or subtract a beat, create timberal changes, etc.. I love unexpected harmonic turns, so sometimes I'll throw in a little modal interchange or chromatic shift while maintaining the same diatonic structure or something along those lines.
Incidentally, this process that I'm describing; setting up an expectation and breaking it, is the same as the definition of humor. Good music and a good joke are essentially the same process.
I just heard Imogen Heap's 'Ellipse' for the first time last night. 'Earth' blew me away and aggravated my long-aching desire to hole up in a studio for a year and do nothing but record an album of heavily-produced a capella music. Who would like to fund such a project? ONE AT A TIME, PEOPLE. NO PUSHING.
' last night. I don't think Pixar has ever made a bad film. I was skeptical of the premises of the last three films (Ratatouille, Wall E, Up), but I think they've turned out to be some of the best work Pixar has ever done.
