> From: "ceccles_ca" <ecclesreinson@...>
> Sender: Mellotronists@yahoogroups.com
>
> MIDI has been utilized to compose and produce a boat load of real
> music. Hans Zimmer has produced soundtracks which are primarily
> digital sampler / midi. He has won Academy awards for about 12
> of them. Zimmer's main sampler is Tascam's GigaStudio.
Interesting example, certainly.
I can't say I know his work; I don't watch many movies. But I was
speaking of a musical instrument performance while the awards for
Zimmer's soundtracks are more about composition, arrangement, scoring,
orchestration, the contribution to the movie, the movie itself, and
these days, politics. And I don't know if Zimmer's work with
GigaStudio actually uses much MIDI; I mean, I understand that
GigaStudio uses MIDI style settings, but the connection from the score
representation to the audio rendering has got to be straight software.
And I'm sure he's got all sorts of tools he's developed.
My point is that MIDI is a very primitive and severely limited
protocol, with timing limitations built into the definition, with very
modest goals and designed for ease of implementation in 1982
technology. And that MIDI cannot represent the subtleties of a
player's personal style and cannot come anywhere near representing
some of our most cherished musical performances.
And unfortunately MIDI has been adopted as a vital link in the chain,
the pipeline between keyboard and synth engine, for just about all
digital keyboards.
So I (and remember I'm supposed to be the snobby fascist luddite twat
in this conversation) am saying the adoption of MIDI is a not a good
thing for a musical instrument. We should use the technology to
leverage creativity and personal expression, not regiment everything
into a byte stream. We should be using a diversity of technologies,
and enjoy the features and quirks of each, and not be forcing
everything into a microprocessor, advanced as it may be.
-- Don
--
Don Tillman
Palo Alto, California
don@...http://www.till.com