On 10/10/2017 5:38 PM, Tom Evans wrote:
It's not the program that says what note, when, for how long, and how
loud, and what instruaments are played.Â* It's the composer who
determines those aspects of the songs -- using the program as a tool to
achieve those aspects of the songs.
Oh, piddle! You know what I mean. For some forms of music, there's a
composer who . . . er . . composes the music. For other forms of music,
sequences of notes are programmed and they're put together to make a
piece of music. Nobody actually plays anything.
But my point is that in one instance, a musician directly plays an
instrument to make a sound. In another instance, the sound might be
generated electronically, someone (who might or might not otherwise be
called a "musician" hits a drum and records its sound, which is played
back under the direction of a computer, that may or may not have been
programmed by a musician or other human.
Conversely, a "true ... recording" is one where an instrument is
played by a real person, it makes a sound, and that sound is captured
by a microphone and recorded.
It's not as clear-cut as you declare; MIDI recording can incorporate
sampled sounds, which are recordings of musicians playing physical
instruments.Â* Entire songs can be MIDI recordings of snippets of
misicians playing instruments, or combine them with synthesized
instrument sounds, and the voices of the central musician and other
physical or sampled or synthesized human voices.
Right - but the musician whose name is on the record isn't playing
exactly what the listener hears. Now I'll admit that with "true"
recording, there's often some manipulation of the sounds coming from the
musician or singer, but it starts out being related to the song being
recorded, not some arbitrary sound that's pasted in under computer
control when the composition or emotion calls for it.
It sounds like you're denigrating MIDI multi-track recording in favor of
physical recording, which as silly as denigrating denigrating digital
art in favor of physical art.
Not at all. It's not that one is good and one is bad, they're just
different. And if you insist on assigning names to the approaches to
production, then there should be definitions that go with those names,
and the definitions should be meaningful.
The important thing is:Â* what emotional effect does the music or the art
have on the viewer or listerner respectively?Â* The tools of music-making
and art-making are irrelevant.
Agreed. But that's not what we were discussing.
--
For a good time, call
http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com