On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 17:08, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote: > On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 04:54:57PM -0400, Peter Lutek wrote: > > On Thu, 2004-09-30 at 14:02, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote: > > > Ok, but bear in mind that at present and probably for several more years > > > I am not attempting to make music at all. I'm really just playing with > > > sounds to hear what might be possible. > > > .... lots of stuff snipped....... > > > Then, eventually I'll sit down to lay out a more structured > > > composition. For this final stage I agree that ardour will be a better > > > suited tool. Perhaps this last type of work is most like other people's > > > work flows. > > ok, thanks, eric. this clarifies what we're talking about here. the > > process of "playing with sounds" is something which i am also interested > > in and which is, for me, a task totally unsuited to a multitrack > > recorder/editor like ardour. there are lots of other linux tools for > > that sort of compositional exploration -- they are rich and varied, and > > that is precisely what i love about linux. when most people say "DAW", > > they are talking about an environment for production of audio recordings > > (i.e. serving the record/edit/master cycle somehow). the subject line > > and greg's original post led me down THAT particular path, perhaps > > mistakenly. anyway, i think we've come to an agreement (based on the > > paragraph quoted above) that, for an editing and assemblage situation, a > > tool with a workflow like ardour's is probably appropriate. this does > > not, of course, diminish the value of many, many other tools with > > different paradigms for creative, compositional activity. the > > record/edit/master process is, after all, a very specific and small > > subset of all the things people might want to do with sound. > > Yeah ... I guess I went off a bit yesterday. I still think that a lot of > what people want to do with ardour can be done in ecasound, or ecasound > plus ECI scripts/applications. Your mention of record/edit/master > process brings up another topic of discussion, though. > > I've never worked in that process. I don't know anything about it > outside of what I learn in these forums from people who are looking to > duplicate the commercially available tool chain with free software. My > impression is that it is a holdover from the commercial CD market, which > should die and go away, IMO. I understand that that market is still how > many people perceive the act, focus and goal of music making. But, I > don't think there is any reason that has to continue as a dominant > paradigm. I will never sell a CD of my own work. > > Mastering, from what I understand, implies that you are focused on > creating some finite product on some mass produced and distributed > physical medium -- That what you work on will somehow be completed, > finished, done and in the can at some point. I think that just because > that has been the dominant channel for the "media" business, that it has > limited so many people to thinking of their work as something that has > to fit into the confines of the prescribed medium. > > That's an unnatural limitation to my mind. > > I may never actually finish a completed work. I may only ever publish > snapshots of the stream of my compositional processes. Perhaps > eventually I will publish only continuous streams, who knows. Rather > than viewing each finite track, song, .ogg file, whatever, as something > concrete and fixed to be listened to repeatedly, I'm thinking it is > possible to work in a much more fluid, and to my senses and > sensibilities, a much more natural way. > > I control my own means of production, and now my own means of > publication as well. The internet is, as far as I'm concerned, > unlimitted. There is no need for a production to be limited to any > finite duration and no need for it to ever be declared completed. > > There may be times and certain material that I want to present within a > more traditional type of framework with a introduction, development, > recap, resolution type of structure. I don't deny that there is a > satisfaction to something that starts and ends. But, I don't think it > has to be the only way to experience sounds. > > anyway ... I've been babling on all week. I appologize if I've seemed to > be incoherent and out of step with the topic the rest of you are > discussing. I'll stop brain dumping into this thread now. I need to get > focused and get my head together ... I have so much more energy lately > than I've had for a very long time. It's wonderful, but at the same time > I feel very scatter-brained and somewhat disoriented. > > -Eric Rz. > thanks for your thoughts, eric. your idea of releasing snapshots of ongoing work is beautiful and refreshing -- certainly appropriate to the state of things, technically. this has been a very fruitful thread, as a vehicle for honest exchange of concepts. best- -p
