Dear List,

I think this "technological parody" discussion is very funny.

As some of you may know, most (if not all) of the north indian classical instruments were designed to sound like the human voice.
I'm very naive, so i 'm wondering : is a sitar a technological parody? Stupid Indians, they get blood-filled blisters on their fingers to learn how to play a technological parody!

Just kidding (though it's true about the desing of indian instruments).

I do believe that the output is the only important thing to consider. The fact that Aphex Twin used a sampler (or whatever, i don't know) to record the drum track to Flim doesn't matter at all to me. This is an amazing piece, that very few musicians (if any) on earth could have created. The fact that he created it on a sequencer in 97 and not on a drumkit in 1963 doesn't make any difference to me.

Pierre

2011/6/23 Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika@yahoo.com>
Certainly could be. :)

Or on the other hand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cuuRG6-IT8

-Jonathan

--- On Thu, 6/23/11, Tyler Leavitt <thecryoflove@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Tyler Leavitt <thecryoflove@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: [PD] Pd performance at TED
To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika@yahoo.com>
Cc: "ALAN BROOKER" <alan.brooker2010@gmail.com>, pd-list@iem.at
Date: Thursday, June 23, 2011, 5:25 AM


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP_w_Mvh9tU

Is this a technological parody?

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yes, it's exactly like that.  But that's the way the term was defined, which-- as you
point out-- covers wide array of synthesis techniques and uses of digital computers.

I would just conclude that it doesn't seem a particularly enlightening term, except for
a specific subset of parodies that have to do with technology.  As a term of derision
I think it's confusing/confused.

-Jonathan

--- On Wed, 6/22/11, ALAN BROOKER <alan.brooker2010@gmail.com> wrote:

From: ALAN BROOKER <alan.brooker2010@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: [PD] Pd performance at TED
To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <jancsika@yahoo.com>
Cc: pd-list@iem.at, "Cody Loyd" <codyloyd@gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, June 22, 2011, 10:44 PM




On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika@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.



_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list



_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list