[sdiy] Ways for innovation

[nvawter]

I'm loving this discussion, everyone...

One of my life's projects has been to merge the worlds of synthesis 
algorithms with the wireless, wandering nature of acoustic 
instruments...

To this end, I collect quotes and notes that interact with my viewpoint 
and one of them by Brian Eno seems pertinent to this conversation:

Check out these two paragraphs:
http://www.diydsp.com/index.php?title=Computer_Music_Isolation#Eno_on_Synthesizers_and_Instruments

My perspective is that instruments come to life through iteration and 
feedback from the community and from a deep, long relationship to the 
player.

Look at the latent TB-303, which languished in obscurity until it was 
properly nurtured :)

So I think it's wise to look to parts of this world where a relationship 
with synthesizers has been carried forward,
whether it's in its enduring features, or in a single instance of an 
instrument which is continuously repaired or upgraded.
We're basically asking ourselves, what is the "literature" of 
synthesizer culture?
Someday, maybe we'll understand what the archetypal symbolism 
("pre-linguistic psychic sub-strata" as Jordan Peterson would put it)
of our (a)vocation is.
Because music is like poetry in that it pre-dates language and 
communicates at a layer grammatical language - with its narrow, 
hyper-focused
chains - usually can't.

We know it's beyond "tension" and "happiness", and there are so many 
more aspects of it.

Hmmm, each time I reply to this thread, I get more and more out there 
and don't bother sending it...  but this time I will...  based strongly 
on the Eno
quote.  I previous deleted posts, I wrote about dubstep's sounds which 
were familiar to all synth experimenters, but had to assembled into a 
repeatable,
expressible form, layered within other genres (dub, hip-hop, drum and 
bass) into order to be perceived as an isolatable, "scientific" unit.  I 
wrote about
campfires, who we're like bonfire participants, and every now and then a 
spark leaps from our fires and standard market synths are like canned 
fuel
stoves - predictable and limited.  I wrote about how we need to play 
more and sequence less.  We need to connect more with musical 
traditions.  I wrote about
how we are alienated and portable devices undermine all this and blah 
blah blah.  Anyway, keep making synths, keep sharing.





On 2016-01-23 05:57, Ove Ridé wrote:
> On 23 January 2016 at 10:32, Gordonjcp <gordonjcp at gjcp.net> wrote:
>> I can't quote directly because your email is a big unreadable blob of 
>> HTML.
>> 
>>> . No matter how often I try to explain to people that a piece of 
>>> software cannot recreate a performance on a real instrument, I always 
>>> have a bunch of people snapping at me...
>> 
>> A piece of software is a real instrument, too.  In fact, many modern 
>> instruments are "pieces of software" running on dedicated hardware 
>> platforms.
>> 
> 
> I think the point he made (whether correct or incorrect) is that
> modern software is made for sequencing first and expressive live
> performance second.