MOTM

--- In motm@y..., "Tony Allgood" <oakley@t...> wrote:
> TA> And there is a school of thought that says the harder it is to 
learn
> the more creative you will become.
> 
> Actually, I didn't say that I agree with this school of thought. 
And I
> don't, not without more quantification. I was just trying to make a
> point that if you have more tools, it will allow you to create 
more. But
> more tools mean a longer or steeper learning curve.
> 
> A simple machine such as the minimoog may not allow textures to be
> created that the composer may want. Its still a great instrument 
though
> [but I wish they had added a few extras like sync, sync sweep, an 
LFO,
> aftertouch... :-) ]
> 
> Of course, making a unit with a badly designed user interface will
> stiffle creativity. That is not without question, and that wasn't my
> point. I merely was trying to say that new esoteric modules that do
> clever things are just another thing to learn not some impenetrable 
wall
> acting against creativity. But make that esoteric module difficult 
to
> use by a poorly designed UI, and that's another story.
> 
> BTW, that particular 'school of thought' I heard used when a music
> teacher was comparing violin playing to recorder playing. The 
violin is
> a complete bugger to master, while the recorder is comparatively 
easy.
> But a well played violin allows more expression and more soul than 
any
> recorder. Actually, I have heard some storming picolo playing, so 
that
> probably puts paid to that idea anyway... :-)
> 
> Tony <- who doesn't make anything terribly esoteric at all


I wasn't shure if you agreed with this "school of thought" but it is 
a relief to know you don't! Your further explanation makes sense. 
And as I tried to explane to Mike Marsh earlier: My reply wasn't 
about Minimoog or MOTM, but about creativity. 

Michel Havenith