There has been a lot of talk about electronic media conservation especially in terms of art galleries and so on. Anyhow this link may be of interest:
http://www.fondation-langlois.org/html/e/page.php?NumPage=135
There is a project that aims to create a data-base that represents the intension of the artist so that when a work needs to be reimplimented after the artist is no longer available they have an archive. This is a serious problem for big galleries like MoMA and so there is some money in developing a solution for it.
B.
Jamie Bullock wrote:
Hi Greg,
I think some kind of effort to consolidate works that use near obsolete technology is essential if the works are to continue being performed. However, just from my very limited experience of updating early works, which use (for example) Yamaha DX and TX series synths, and E-mu samplers, I can envisage that a centralised project to do this could be a time consuming, and possibly thankless task.
I think that a good way forward for this would be a 'prevention rather than cure' approach. I have sometimes had to produce inaccurate performances of works because the composer's documentation for live electronics has been incomplete or unclear, and the composer has not been available for contact. A possibility for resolving this could be some kind of loose standard for documentation. The rationale behind this is that if the techniques are sufficiently well documented, it should be possible to reproduce them from the documentation using currently available technology. In this sense the PDRP is still a very useful resource, particularly from a musicological standpoint.
Perhaps the project should become the live electronics Repertory Documentation Project. Once some kind of standard format has been established (a bit like the How-to philposophy from the Linux Documentation Project), it might gradually become common practice.
Wishful thinking?
Jamie
On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 15:15 +0200, ggkarman@musicologia.com wrote:
Hello Arie,
What is the expected future of PDRP in the short? Is the music to be
included restricted to originally pd/fts/max.. pieces?
-This whole attemp was rather nastily twarted by IRCAM. Miller developed some considerable tools, used in their first phase of realizing score-following. They revised their technology with FTM & Suivi objects and more or less denied him the right to continue. Also the repertory using these seem to santified by IRCAM.
I'm really sorry. I didn't know about this. I hope this question hasn't been inconvenient. This is really sad.
i've seen several edus are teaching live electronic classics, but
haven't found >any more patches out there.
-Maybe this a good reason to start the basis of a general repertory
I wish that patches, scores and other materials would be of free access to the rest of the world, at least for educational use. That can surely be handled by some kind of licence.
and the registration of that.
I'm sorry but i dont understand what you mean with 'the registration'. Do you mean a (world-wide catalogue), like RISM or something like that?
Different pieces / different composers / different demands demand different tools: PD, Max/MSP, SuperCollider.
Are there any 'open' classical pieces under these other platforms?
The outcome of these considerations need to be that a more genral description is provided by people who want these resources to be applied and to be applicable to their work(s).
But as this hasn't been done very frecuently yet, will we have to wait 75 years (or whatever the time of the rights of the music and software to become public domain) to get our hands on this music?
Miller's attempt is is something to be encouraged.
Indeed it is.
greg.
AvS
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list