[PD] Pd performance at TED

[ALAN BROOKER]

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika at yahoo.com> wrote:

> You're right, no one ever said that.  Even me.
>
> Did you actually look at the patch?  It is a technological parody of record
> scratching.
> It perfectly fits the definition given on this list.  If you don't think
> so, then
> please tell me what you can do with that patch that's so musically
> interesting that it
> would warrant buying a modern digital computer instead of a turntable.
>
>
Well, one might want to connect the sampler patch to another patch that
produces a contrasting sound, they both would share the same values sent to
the atom to change pitches ect.

Don't you think to say a patch that emulates scratching sounds from audio
samples is a technological parody of a scratching record player, is a bit
like saying a patch that emulates the sound of the piano is a technological
parody of a piano (they are both instruments)?. I think one purpose of audio
software to emulate instruments ?  Regarding if it is musically interesting,
I'm v. sure you know record scratching is(was?) used as an instrument in hip
hop and such.

If a purpose of audio software is emulation of physical instruments  then I
don't think it should be  labeled as a technological parody.  Otherwise you
could use the argument 'why have a computer when I can buy a physical
instrument' every time?

 Just sharing thoughts really, interesting topic.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20110622/17b26fdc/attachment.htm>