linuxaudio.org

--14dae93408213938f504b8555134

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
> take a listen to lou reed's metal machine music or pat metheny's zero

quoted text
> tolerance for silence or any of boyd rice's stuff and then imagine

> that its the first demo you ever came across of this crazy new thing

> they call an "electric guitar". next you'd be telling me that the

> guitar is not usable as a way to make music that people want to hear

>

Without having watched the videos you mention: I've had that "oh cooool"

response to a lot of the mobile / tablet apps, I've never yet had the

"wauw, that will be useful to me to create better music" response. Then

again I own a normal phone, and no tablet. Maybe a bit more exposure would

get me hooked.
@Leigh:

Point taken about the "played on the radio".

In a sense what society thinks about the music I create doesn't really make

a difference either: What matters is if it sounds like I want it to. If it

does, I'm happy. If it doesn't, then I'll either work on it more, or get

frustrated. My experience of touch-interfaces (bar hardware xy controllers)

has been pretty frustrating, hence I don't want to use them :)
Making music is the reason that I code, the reason that I use the

interfaces I do, to try and achieve my goals. If the interface doesn't

support me *creatively*, I'm not going to want to use it. That's actually

the reason that I'm not currently using Ableton Live, its workflow doesn't

match the way I would like to create music (although it's w/flow is much

closer than most other software)
Regarding the predictablity: I don't understand why somebody would use that

tool to create the noises they did. So I did assume that the tool isn't

providing the output they hoped for. Perhaps I should assume its *exactly*

what they wanted. Either way the tool will reproduce the same output given

the same input: I'm not doubting the software's capabilites. But I'm

talking about interfaces here. Did the user have enough control while

interacting to achieve what they wanted? I dont think so, but I could well

be wrong.
I'll try get some touchscreen time and see where that takes me :) -Harry
--14dae93408213938f504b8555134

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Paul Davis <paul@linuxa=

udiosystems.com> wrote:

take a listen to lou reed's metal machine music or pat metheny's ze=

ro

tolerance for silence or any of boyd rice's stuff and then imagine

that its the first demo you ever came across of this crazy new thing

they call an "electric guitar". next you'd be telling me that=

 the

guitar is not usable as a way to make music that people want to hearWithout having watched the videos you mention: I've =

had that "oh cooool" response to a lot of the mobile / tablet app=

s, I've never yet had the "wauw, that will be useful to me to crea=

te better music" response. Then again I own a normal phone, and no tab=

let. Maybe a bit more exposure would get me hooked.

@Leigh: Point taken about the "played on the radio".I=

n a sense what society thinks about the music I create doesn't really m=

ake a difference either: What matters is if it sounds like I want it to. If=

 it does, I'm happy. If it doesn't, then I'll either work on it=

 more, or get frustrated. My experience of touch-interfaces (bar hardware x=

y controllers) has been pretty frustrating, hence I don't want to use t=

hem :)
Making music is the reason that I code, the reason that I use the interface=

s I do, to try and achieve my goals. If the interface doesn't support m=

e *creatively*, I'm not going to want to use it. That's actually th=

e reason that I'm not currently using Ableton Live, its workflow doesn&=

#39;t match the way I would like to create music (although it's w/flow =

is much closer than most other software)
Regarding the predictablity: I don't understand why somebody would =

use that tool to create the noises they did. So I did assume that the tool =

isn't providing the output they hoped for. Perhaps I should assume its =

*exactly* what they wanted. Either way the tool will reproduce the same out=

put given the same input: I'm not doubting the software's capabilit=

es. But I'm talking about interfaces here. Did the user have enough con=

trol while interacting to achieve what they wanted? I dont think so, but I =

could well be wrong.

I'll try get some touchscreen time and see where that takes me :) -=

Harry
--14dae93408213938f504b8555134--