Re: [linux-audio-user] More Homemade Music --

On Mon, 04 Jul, 2005 at 11:35AM +0200, Thorsten Wilms spake thus:
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 09:02:38AM +0100, james@email-addr-hidden-dot-dat.net wrote:
> >
> > I've never been able to work like that. I know that's the way it
> > should be done, with steps and definable phases, but I just have to do
> > everything at once.
>
> Who says it should be done with steps and definable phases?
> A methodology is a tool, not a dogma. We industrial design students
> are taught that a project starts with a briefing, followed by
> reserach, conception, design, visualization/modeling/simulation ...
> But often you will have to rethink the briefing after the research or
> do additional research based on your conception.
> There's rarely a clear line between conception and design. And when
> the outcome after a step doesn't meet the expectations, you might have
> to iterate through the whole process.
>
> With music, composition, arrangement and production can be clear steps
> or it can all be one more or less chaotic process. Whatever works.
>
> Sounds you choose while you're playing to find a nice harmony or
> melody will influence the outcome.
>
> A drum pattern's feel/groove depends much on the sounds, so creating
> /editing it and choosing/tweaking sounds got to be interconnected.
>
> When more of the final piece is in place, you might need to readjust
> some details.

I agree totally. I didn't mean that there was a rule about following
the phases, just that that's always how it's presented, and rarely how
it works for me.
 
>
> To avoid getting lost in details upfront, one can create a draft
> version first, without caring for exact levels, optimal patch
> selection/tweaked sounds, effects for the most part.

This is where I find it difficult. It's all or nothing for me.

>
> Thorsten Wilms
>

-- 
"I'd crawl over an acre of 'Visual This++' and 'Integrated Development
That' to get to gcc, Emacs, and gdb.  Thank you."
(By Vance Petree, Virginia Power)