Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Reasons for using C sound

Here's a bit of a meandering. A detailed and fruitful debate has
arisen over the uses and abuses of C Sound and computers in general. I
thought I'd share with y'all some of the reasons I have for setting out
to explore this amazing musical resource.

I have an electronic studio which probably reached state of the art for
about 3 nanoseconds sometime in the late 90's. Then Macintosh brought
out their new line of iMacs, eliminating floppy drives and SCSI and
bringing in USB ports and a new Operating System. Steinberg upgraded
Cubase VST which meant that my master disk crashes with newer operating
systems. They refuse to reply to my constant emails requesting a fix for
this. So I basically decided that Steinberg can go and &*^% themselves
(same goes for Macintosh, but I need a computer to correspond with
y'all). I then asked what I wanted from all this technology. My main
interest is in 'physical' musical instruments. I find time to compose
for 22 tet guitar and to play lute. Now I've started building and tuning
instruments and I've never been happier. But I'm still fascinated with
electronics and feel that familiarity at least is essential for
contemporary composers. I'm a great admirer of people like Ivor Darreg
who was proficient as a builder, tuner and designer of electronic
systems.

Computer/electronic music, and I include midi systems, is difficult to
partition in terms of art versus functional music. This is a big topic.
I like to think of myself as an artist, striving to create beauty and
honour the Creator (sounds conceited but I mean it humbly). I don't like
pop music and I'm sick of dance music, so making functional music would
be a waste of my time. I have the greatest respect for those who can
produce music of quality using midi systems. I never liked my work with
midi, except when producing techno, ambient or drum & bass, or when
modelling compositions. Midi is good for programming beats. Aphex Twin
and Autechre and numerous others manage to transcend the functionality
of dance music and produce at times works of art and virtuosity. I don't
want to clone their work however and my principal interests lie
elsewhere, namely, in instrument making and alternative tuning systems
of the sort we discuss. I'm still unsure as to the effect of electronic
beats on the listener. I prefer raw live sounds myself. I was letting a
pianist/chorister friend listen to some analogue synth compositions
(soon to be mp3s), played live and made using a Doepfer analogue synth
system (an A-100) and analogue sequencer with FX and he was bowled
over. Noticing the drum machine he suggested adding beats but I pointed
out that you then lose the beauty of the irregularity of envelope and
LFO modulations if you pin down everything with beats.

(An aside, I recently heard of someone being refused funding from a
"classical" source because the music had beats. Was that on this list?
Would Steve Reich have been turned down? Obviously barriers still to
come down.)

The point I'm labouring at here is that I no longer need midi. For pure
electronic music of the arty variety I use a simple but powerful
system. Although I can't model sophisticated tuning systems, I can pull
parts of the harmonic series out of complex waveforms and I can tune the
2 oscillators relative to each other using a very smooth tuning control.
I would hope that this music would be of interest in terms of tuning.
All in real time and with total clarity and depth. Unfortunately the
analogue sequencer (a Doepfer MAQ) sends out notes stepped to 12 et but
I can overcome this by sending the same pitch to both oscillators and
then tuning the oscillators from the tuning knob. So the sequencer
becomes a tremendous real time rhythmic generator.

I had intended to use my midi set up to model tunings and timbres prior
to building, say, a tubulong or zither. But now that I've got sick of
the greed and indifference of the large companies who provide the
products I can't bring myself to keep throwing money at them. I am
therefore attracted to C Sound. It seems to me to be simple but not easy
if you get my drift. Also I post a problem and within hours I get
replies from the best experts around the world. Very impressive. I can
now learn to model timbres and tunings using just my Mac. No cables, no
shelling out for this or that upgrade, no extension conflicts, just a
few initial glitches, now sorted, and a steep learning curve. I don't
see the time spent as composition time lost. Leave no stone unturned as
they say. Maybe in a few years I will to be able to produce 'pure'
computer music that would be of artistic interest, though that is
secondary. I'm not in a position yet to judge whether C sound will be as
sonically powerful as my analogue system. I doubt if I could get round
to composing for computer and live instrument(s) in the same way as I
could for my analogue system and live instrument(s). I have problems
with the visual implications of performances, but that might have
changed by the time I learn how to use C sound.

But most of all I will be able to speak obscure and exotic tongues with
all you programmers. Good shock value at dinner parties.

Best Wishes.

Reasons for using C sound

🔗Alison Monteith <alison.monteith3@which.net>

🔗shreeswifty <ppagano@bellsouth.net>

🔗jpehrson@rcn.com