It may be me, but..
Isn't a computer just a hardware synthesiser with a different interface?
In fact I think some synths actually have computers inside them, I could
be wrong though.
There is some irony in technophobes on a techno mailing list?
Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote:
On 8/30/06, Dale Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--but I thought you said the tools didn't matter? Which is it? All
the ground is already broken then?
the tools DON'T matter, as long as theyre not being used a substitute
for ideas and good music. which in the case of dylan and kraftwerk,
they werent. in the case of X number of computer musicians, they are.
i prefer people who keep it simple and limited because it makes it
almost ALL about the ideas and music as opposed to some programming
trick or DSP nonsense.
Do you think people really just press return on their computer?
uh, yes? isnt it obvious?
Did you receive my point about all the new technologies in music...
or even art in general, such as photography, always receiving
resistance in their infancy?
its not really a new point, and i understand it. however, im skeptical
of any technology that makes things more complex for no reason.
with
the power of the modern computer based stuido, it should easily be
possible for people to crank out tunes much better than the original
house and techno tracks, right?
well that's just not happening, only a
deluded person would say that the quality of tracks has increased in
direct proportion to the complexity of the equipment being used to
make them.
This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses, which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
