I was very inspired by sci -fi writer Paul J. McAuley who described a future
rave where multiple VJ/DJ people controlled extensive banks of bio feedback
sensors .. in this system everyone in the audience provides input and
everyone is able to filter and feedback the input sources onto the system
which is an interconnected series of sound systems, holographic projectors,
lasers and lights.
the ultimate biofeedback sensor is the deejay!
I suppose I see limitations in the singular Dj as a bio feedback sensor. At
least I
don't herald the the role of the Dj as much as I used to.
Besides .. what I am suggesting is to providing a Dj more input sources to work
more information to manipulate. Real-time organic inputs that are a result of
the
situation that is occuring. Then shifting their position as the central figure
to one
that perhaps working in collaboration with many other to facilitating the
audience
experience.
Haven't we been through the whole exercise as Dj being God!
Maybe we will end up like the chess world where we try to build a machine that
can mix better the Jeff Mills ??
I'm not particularly interested in the ultimate machine DJ. But I am
interested in
where technology can take the performance of music.
In my area, raving developed completely new music audiences and ways of
experiencing music.
those ways were not "new". they may have been new to you and your
contemporaries, but an examination of the history of music will show
that those ideas were not new.
I do understand this Tom.
I study my history as well. However as a generation, Rave was our way of
capturing the "process" and finding our own interpretations for mass
celebration.
Why are we not allowed to claim some ownership and involvement with how
we control our environments?
If everything has happened before and there is nothing new under the sun,
then where am I supposed to locate myself as a free thinking individual.
You are prescribing me a role of either being the artist or the audience.
What's wrong with removing this separation? Whats wrong with blurring the
line between who is in control and who is being controlled?
One of the documented and often celebrated aspects of original rave culture
was how it made everyone part of the experience. People revelled in the idea
that their presence in the dance was significant.
The early inspirations of dance music reflected this positive enthusiasm.
The music responded to and initiated the tribal, collective nature of the dance.
The shift away from ego centric front of house production enlightened people
in a way that was reminiscent of beating drums around a fire ??
Why is it such a challenge to suggest we continue to explore this more
collective energy in the music?
You are arguing that you want to experience the artist in the music, yet you are
also saying that the artist is a feedback filter to the audience. So why not
open
up this process reduce the mediation and increase the feedback?
If technology is enabling us to reproduce, trigger, sample, filter, effect and
manipulate music in increasingly complex ways.. why could an artist or group
of artists not be enabled to enable the audience to be in control of their own
experience .
In an advanced way this is continuing to take music back to its roots, where
everyone was a contributor to the rhythm. Where all the voices in the village
made the melody together.
Why not break down this continual separation and isolation of people from each
other. Sure its challenging, slightly feral, non-commercial way to think ..
But in a world where nothing is new, and everything has been done .. then maybe
this is something that we could do with all our latest toys .. which is to go
all the
way back to "Africa" and be completely tribal by allowing everyone to be a part
of the music.
Not sure how you could add that to your collection. . but it could be some fun.
.simon
