about me

 

process III I recently downloaded the trial version of Syntrillium Software's Cool Edit Pro, an excellent piece of multitracking / audio editing software. Over the past week or so I've been putting it through its paces, both on my own and with Chris. The process of making music with a program like this is very very different from the process of recording music directly to the MiniDisc recorder. One way to work with it, I suppose, would be to begin by recording an entire track (a rhythm track, for instance) and then to build things on top of it, layering upwards. But mostly I've been choosing a smaller building block to work with: I've been starting with individual sounds. The program allows you to perform a vast number of operations on a single sound, and once you're satisfied with it you can take that sound and place it anywhere you'd like in the mix, in combination with any number of other sounds. One immediate result of working that way is that I immediately begin to develop a nonlinear conception of the piece. Seeing the whole mix, laid out before me, and having suddenly been given the ability to concentrate on any segment of it, interferes with my understanding of a piece of music as something that begins and then moves forwards, developing as it goes. Whether this reconceptualization will be creatively useful remains to be seen—the fact remains that the act of listening is still linear. A second result is that the emphasis in my soundmaking has shifted from performance to process. (From performing to processing, if you prefer.) The program dramatically increases my ability to perform procedures on a single sound, and I'm drawn to the dramatic, unpredictable effects produced by certain sets of these procedures. I'm a long-time lover of process art, so I have no problem accepting the application of algorithms as a suitable substitute for the intentionality of composition. See something like the 9 Beet Stretch (thanks Judith). But there are dangers here. Too much emphasis on processing reduces the social dimension of music: if you can generate interesting sounds just by sitting in a room with yourself and your computer, why bother seeking out other musicians? I've long been surprised by the relative dearth of musicians and bands that compellingly balance the digital and the acoustic. The division makes more sense now that I'm beginning to understand the procedural differences of each type of musicmaking, but I still feel like the membrane that seperates different musical worlds should be breached as often as possible. Much of music's power lies in its ability to cross-fertilize, and any tendency towards insularity must be resisted. Last week, I saw computer music and performance combined in a beautiful display, when I had the pleasure of watching George Lewis and Roscoe Mitchell improvise (on trombone and sax) along with a Yamaha grand piano controlled by an algorithmic entity (programmed by Lewis). Another possible danger is just the danger of becoming overwhelmed by the sheer preponderance of options. As I become more familiar with the various tools at my disposal I sense that I'll be able to use them with less bewilderment, but the sheer infinity of options inherent in multitracking perhaps reinvigorates the need for OULIPO-style artistic restraints, similar to those that govern Herbert's PCCOM (Personal Contract for the Composition Of Music). Labels: creative_process, music_commentary

Saturday, September 07, 2002 11:40 AM   Comments: Post a Comment