Paul Davis wrote: > its not just that randomness is OK. its that (a) a highly quantized > (b) low parameter experience is OK. Are you saying that work produced in PD or csound is more art than work produced in Abbleton Live or Renoise? No need to read between the lines here: I use renoise, and feel provoked by what I seem to read between the lines of your post :-) For me it's a matter of picking the right tool. I am actually a jazz pianist (studied four years at the conservatory), plus I have a thing for electronic music. When I play bebop I'm not gonna bring my computer, in that context the piano is the best tool. But when I want to make electronic music, the piano's not helping me create the sounds I hear in my head. And neither is PD. I tried alot of different software (mostly the free stuff this thread seems to value more than commercial alternatives), and so far renoise supports me the best in getting the sound I'm after. I'm not saying this to you in particular, Paul (actually I need to hear this myself as well), but I think we could all benefit if we could: 1) Accept that genres are different, and we don't like them all. Any musical genre could potentially be used as a medium for "art" or "crap". 2) Accept that software are different. Obviously we all here would prefer free tools, and the quality of different software can unquestionably vary, making the tool either useless or useful, I guess we all prefer stable, well thought out software. Still, any software can be used for generating "art" or "crap". -- Atte http://atte.dk http://modlys.dk _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
