Head To Head
Log In
Register
Unsung Forum »
Bowie, genius or not...
Log In to post a reply

Pages: 14 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ]
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
stray
stray
2057 posts

Edited Jul 28, 2010, 12:18
Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:17
stray wrote:

Digital has no theoretical constraints, but we have to impose constraints in order to abstract enough to create an understandable movement within ourselves that will allow us to produce work.


The 'fractured I', as in the chasm between the 'self' (undeterminable) and 'I' (the determined). We create symbols and structures between the Self and I to er.. get by. This is where digital is important, it makes it painfully obvious that we're filling the crack between the two by giving raw unformed data a structure (sound, image, file formats) so we can create, express or explain. What we don't really have (apart from the horribly unstable PureData, and that has limits too) is digital tools that allow us to really get into that essential malleability of the medium, yet. When we do, what will it sound, or look like.
IanB
IanB
6761 posts

Edited Jul 28, 2010, 12:30
Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:23
stray wrote:

Edit Ha, Um ah.. Basically I'm doing the same thing you describe. Whereas when you get to the production stage it goes back to liquid, all I've done is made the edit liquid again, as it should be.. um.. but again, that's my work flow and the work produced must be mirroring or revealing it to some degree.



I am sure someone somewhere has a doctoral thesis about this very subect on the go as we write.

Essentially Pro Tools et al are an aggregation of manuscript paper, notation, tape and recording console into a chain of decisions represented in a succession of 2D snapshots. The portability and flexibility are undeniable. What do we lose working this way? Interesting question.
Squid Tempest
Squid Tempest
8787 posts

Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:25
Fascinating discussion. I like the idea of an editor less bound by the restrictions of blocks of audio and timelines.

I've never tried Ableton - how does it differ from Cubase etc? I only know that it is designed more for live work. Perhaps I should look into it a bit more closely.
stray
stray
2057 posts

Edited Jul 28, 2010, 12:28
Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:26
Its not a question of what we are losing (nothing at all, you're right), its a question of what we could have instead. Digital being a purely symbolic space and all that.
Kid Calamity
8987 posts

Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:27
8 And wonky teeth
IanB
IanB
6761 posts

Edited Jul 28, 2010, 12:35
Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:30
I think if this is a practical or philisophical issue for someone making music (or film) then your music's DNA will be structurally different than if you don't think about it. "Not better" or "worse". And to the listener it may sound exactly the same. As a believer in the profound value of mistakes and accidents I tend to believe in music's mystical strengths as a performing art. Though of course the same thing is equally possible in digital recording. As long as you don't feel compelled to correct those accidents so that they conform to the implied tramlines. Though have there ever been stricter tramlines than the 12 tone scale? Thus spake the fretless bass player with an inconsistent relationship with pitch!
stray
stray
2057 posts

Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:32
http://www.ableton.com/

Give it a go (30 days for free), check the tutorial videos on there of people using it http://www.ableton.com/movies (bottom of page). You may hate it, but I reckon it's always good to change your tools just to see how it changes your work.

You'll find it easy to use, though you may find yourself switching to the time line view for 'warm fuzzys' when you first use it. The strangest feeling you'll get is how looking at the take screen (main screen, whatever its called) leaves you feeling that your music is 'unstuck' and never fixed.
IanB
IanB
6761 posts

Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:33
stray wrote:
http://www.ableton.com/

Give it a go (30 days for free), check the tutorial videos on there of people using it http://www.ableton.com/movies (bottom of page). You may hate it, but I reckon it's always good to change your tools just to see how it changes your work.

You'll find it easy to use, though you may find yourself switching to the time line view for 'warm fuzzys' when you first use it. The strangest feeling you'll get is how looking at the take screen (main screen, whatever its called) leaves you feeling that your music is 'unstuck' and never fixed.


Sounds fabulous. I have a free copy somewhere that came with some hardware. Must dig it out.
Kid Calamity
8987 posts

Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:37
If he were overrated then all his albums would get sycophantic rave reviews. As it is, much of his recent work has had fair, but often critical appraisal.

He is highly regarded by the more discerning. And that's very important. Somebody once referred to the record producer Pete Waterman as a genius - So I'll have to say David Bowie clearly isn't in that category. Thank fuck.

Personally, I think David Bowie is fantastic. I see it as a privilege to have walked the same planet at the same time as such a person. That's all that matters, to me. And it should be to everyone else, IMO.

I would dearly love to see him perform live once more.
stray
stray
2057 posts

Edited Jul 28, 2010, 13:01
Re: Bowie, genius or not...
Jul 28, 2010, 12:41
IanB wrote:
I think if this is an issue for someone making music (or film) then your music's DNA will be structurally different than if you don't think about it. "Not better" or "worse".


Yep, agree, thats a given. But not thinking about it doesn't mean your work isn't still being profoundly influenced by these things. Edit: As in, I'm not saying its good or not either, but how much of your work is a product of your reaction to the tools ?

Happy accidents occur in both film and music making all the time, sometimes they're a result of the vagaries of the tools, sometimes they're the result of a finger slip or a cloud moving over the sun.

Whatever, what I'm getting at is that digital production, both in film and music, is not delivering the freedom that it could. I'm a post-structuralist and an ex-coder/designer, I've seen exactly the same limitation issues crop up in modelling complex systems. Our solution for that was to model the process, not the data. We could take the same approach with all creative digital tools, the data does not have to take a form until it's process has been decided by the artist. That to me is the way forward. Let the information float about unformed until the artist has decided what to do with it. Rather than giving them set blocks, structures, formats, codecs in advance of the creative process.

Node based tools are a massive leap in that direction. However, time based media is time based media, the evil time line will arrive eventually, but it shouldn't arrive until the exact moment it is required. Also you can create time based work (generative work for example) without recourse to one at all.
Pages: 14 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ] Add a reply to this topic

Unsung Forum Index