Re: Rifle Click --> Shutter Click / synth

[lishka@cernvax.cern.ch (christopher lishka)]

In <7B6EC7AB6000009B@sc.intel.com> AGOUGH@FAB6.intel.COM ("Andy Gough, x4-2906, pager 420-2284, CH2-59") writes:

>	1) can't afford muscians with real instruments
>	2) think the sound is "neat" and "technological"
>	3) one person can program it all ("one man band" concept)
>	4) it's easier (e.g., drum machines)
>
>Not that this necessarily is bad per se--after all, it probably enables more
>people to make music.

I think this is very apparent when one considers bands like The The
(which is, actually, mostly Matt Johnson).  He started out using
synthesizers heavily (to great effect, IMHO), and was pretty much a
one-man band.  From there he has progressed to using synths and other
"real" instruments played by other musicians.  I wonder if his early
stuff would be the same if he had not used synths so heavily, and if
his later stuff was influenced by his synth work (I would think so).
Other good examples include bands like Ministry, Shriekback, and Yello
(all really good bands, IMHO), who wouldn't be what they are without
synthesizers.

My Dad used to tell me about the days when Bob Dylan was heavily
criticized for playing an electric guitar at a folk festival
(doubtless some of you remember this yourself, but I was a bit too
young).  Now electric guitar is a standard almost everywhere, and
people like Richard Thompson regularily play folk music with one.  I
think the synthesizer will likely end up the same way.

>Now, this is a real instrument, but an unreal performance.  Which is
>better?  Flute playing with breaths, or flute playing without taking a
>breath?  I don't think it has an easy answer--it's just another
>example of how technology is changing how we view and perceive our
>world.

I feel that it doesn't matter.  If you like the end result, who cares
how it was played or created?  (Of course, I am ducking moral issues
like sample sounds of people being murdered, but I think you know what
I mean above.)  There are some really lousy songs done on conventional
instruments, and there are some really great songs done with sampled
instruments on the synth.

That flute example sounds very interesting (I play flute).
Personally, I never found the breathing to be distracting, and people
like Ian Anderson and Roland Kirk use it for great effect.  But if the
piece sounds better, I see nothing wrong editing out the breathing
(although it seems like a lot of work).

Another interesting example is digital editing used recently to lift
Charlie "Bird" Parker's performances and splice them into a modern
jazz band.  This was done so to get around the poor recording quality
of Bird's era.  I have heard these pieces, and personally I liked the
originals better (possibly because Bird's backup band may have been
better).  This can cause religious wars like the film-colorization
issue.  I don't mind this, but I think that the recording industry
(and the film industry) should take care to preserve the originals.

Just my thoughts....

		The beaten generation, the beaten generation
		Reared on a diet of prejudice and misinformation
		The beaten generation, the beaten generation
		Open your eyes, open your imagination!
				-- The The

						.oO Chris Oo.
-- 
 Christopher Lishka                  Smiling as the shit comes down
 Wisconsin Group, CERN               You can tell a man from what he has to say
 lishka@cernvax.cern.ch                                        -- Crowded House