Subject: RE: [linux-audio-dev] midi not professionally used - you're joking right was Still Icannot understand why
From: Ivica Bukvic (ico_AT_fuse.net)
Date: Sun Dec 16 2001 - 05:34:32 EET
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-linux-audio-dev_AT_music.columbia.edu
[mailto:owner-linux-audio-
> dev_AT_music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Allan Klinbail
> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 3:02 AM
> To: linux-audio-dev_AT_music.columbia.edu
> Subject: [linux-audio-dev] midi not professionally used - you're
joking
> right was Still Icannot understand why
>
>
> > It's not all in midi. On the contrary, very few professional
electronic
> > music artists use midi for anything more than some kind of external
> > controller. On the other hand, while Ardour is going to be the app
of
> > all multitrack apps, currently there are plenty for non-real-time
mixing
> > out there which do job more than adequately (obviously including
snd).
>
> > Ico
> >
> > (the man who made "D" in LAD stand for Discussion ;-)
>
>
> Hey ICO I have to highly disagree with this statement ....just about
> every studio that isn't a mastering studio is using MIDI to one degree
> or another.. My studio ... which is professional in that I do make
money
> out of my music is highly MIDI oriented with over 8 individual devices
> all being sequenced or affected by MIDI (this doesn't include my MOTU
8
> in 8 out MIDI rack ... all of my colleagues bar one or two have MIDI
> driven setups... it is really only in the non electronic based or
> computer only systems which don't use MIDI ... generally as soon as
any
> electronic device (synthesiser, drum machine, FX units) is plugged in
to
> a computer MIDI is going to make use of that instrument much easier..
> take for example my Yamaha An-200 ..... without MIDI it would be
> impossible to edit all parameters of a sound as many are only
accessible
> via MIDI sysex instructions. This is even more true for the Nord
Modular
> series.
>
> Okay there are people working with non electronic music formats using
> their computer as a multitrack recorder.... but if MIDI weren't
relevant
> at a professional level it would not be include in professional audio
> hardware and it would not have become part of the mLan protocol...
Well, I'll try my best to clear your misconception about my statement
without stimulating an outright "flame war."
It seems to me like you have some serious misconceptions about the
modern art music. Let me elaborate:
In my studio where I teach electronic music, we have 2 studios: one for
"intro to electronic music," loaded with midi stuff and rack-mountable
midi modules (something you'd call your type of pro-studio), and the one
we call "advanced" where the only midi we use (if we use it at all) is
for some kind of real-time controller hooked-up to control real-time
changes in the sound processing or something similar. I must admit that
I live in a somewhat "isolated" non-profitable educational community
(where we like to see ourselves as making art for art's sake, since we
have no commercial stimuli to "poison" or limit our inspiration or our
artistic output), but if you do a little of research, you'll realize
that from this exact community comes the most radical [bleeding-edge]
electronic art music (at least in the U.S.) (here, I am referring to
electronic music in very strict terms, where it stands for a very
specific type of acousmatic art [coming from the Greek word "akousma"
and meaning "sound that is removed from its source"], and thus by
stating this I am NOT trying to exclude or undermine other forms of
electronic art, but rather make a clear-cut distinction for the
point-making sake). You'll also realize that most of them do not do
midi, unless, as I said, it has to do with some kind of an external
controller (i.e. pd or jmax/max-msp). Again, this does not mean that the
people such as yourself do not use the same apps for your creations, but
you use them with completely different goal in mind (i.e. I could use
jmax to build a granular synthesis patch that could have its parameters
controlled through midi, while you could use jmax to trigger bunch of
sequenced stuff on a Kurzweil 2500 module).
While most of us (in my community) do know how to do midi, and do it
well, we resort to a more abstract art that is not limited by the
click-track's resolution, neither by the commercial soundbanks (which
could potentially make all of our music sound similar, as is the case
with the commercial industry), nor limitations of the synths as to how
many oscillators we can mix at the same time without "choking" the
equipment. While you say that midi offers "control" over the equipment,
you are missing the point that most of that equipment that you control
with it is commercial, and as such poses a great problem of sounding the
"same" regardless who uses it (i.e. every piece using enchant DX-7
patches will have that common, recognizable sound), and on top of that
offers a lot less flexibility than a raw sound data that can be
manipulated and processed until the sound morphs into a completely new
and unique entity (i.e. your effects processor will offer you only as
much flexibility as the manufacturer decides to provide, while in my
case, I design my own effects processor that is tailored to my own
needs). Basically, the two communities (mine and yours), have very
little in common, other than using some of the same equipment/software.
With all this being said, and since I have a huge problem using other
people's patches, loops, and effects and calling it my own creation, I
would call your idea of studio a "production studio," while mine an
"art-studio" [with the prefix "pro" included when appropriate].
Yet, I do understand that the apps we're talking about here, on this
list, would profit the most from being used in the commercial, mostly
midi-driven community, since that is the place where money lies, and
only by adopting linux in such environment would bring this os the fame
of being the best DAW. And this is where I believe the root of our
[mis]understanding lies, we look upon the music-making issue from two
completely different aspects that can by no means be compared.
> Paul I have to agree that there aren't many people at this stage
> professionally producing music with Linux cept the bleeding edge
> users/developers of Ardour and MusE .... It is only possible for me to
> use in certain areas (say sample editing and some MIDI sequencing from
> time to time when I have MusE working correctly..... Luckily I can
> depend on my hardware based studio to run most of what I do need in
> real-time application ...
I've already said it, and I'll say it again, there ARE quite a few
people using linux at this stage, but not for the purposes of building
midi-sequenced dance tunes, but rather abstract sonic landscapes which
have little or no need for the midi. Ardour and Muse are not the only
gems [or should I say gems-to-be?] of the linux audio community. Other
apps might be less user-friendly, but then again, that is what makes
user's piece so unique sounding, something that is not as stupidly
easily created as is the case with acid loops (whose loops, btw are
sadly now showing up all over the tv commercials and movies, thus
diminishing little of the art that is left in such business).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Dec 16 2001 - 05:29:19 EET