Paul Davis wrote:
> its not just that randomness is OK. its that (a) a highly quantized
Are you saying that work produced in PD or csound is more art than work
produced in Abbleton Live or Renoise?
No need to read between the lines here: I use renoise, and feel provoked
by what I seem to read between the lines of your post :-)
For me it's a matter of picking the right tool. I am actually a jazz
pianist (studied four years at the conservatory), plus I have a thing
for electronic music. When I play bebop I'm not gonna bring my computer,
in that context the piano is the best tool. But when I want to make
electronic music, the piano's not helping me create the sounds I hear in
my head. And neither is PD. I tried alot of different software (mostly
the free stuff this thread seems to value more than commercial
alternatives), and so far renoise supports me the best in getting the
sound I'm after.
I'm not saying this to you in particular, Paul (actually I need to hear
this myself as well), but I think we could all benefit if we could:
1) Accept that genres are different, and we don't like them all. Any
musical genre could potentially be used as a medium for "art" or "crap".
2) Accept that software are different. Obviously we all here would
prefer free tools, and the quality of different software can
unquestionably vary, making the tool either useless or useful, I guess
we all prefer stable, well thought out software. Still, any software can
be used for generating "art" or "crap".
Linux-audio-user mailing list