electro-music.com   Dedicated to experimental electro-acoustic
and electronic music
 
    Front Page  |  Radio
 |  Media  |  Forum  |  Wiki  |  Links
Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
 FAQFAQ   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   LinksLinks
 RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in  Chat RoomChat Room 
go to the radio page Live at electro-music.com radio 1 Please visit the chat
poster
 Forum index » Discussion » Composition
Polyphony - less expression?
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: elektro80
Page 1 of 2 [30 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Author Message
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Sun May 08, 2005 3:51 pm    Post subject: Polyphony - less expression? Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Quote:
In fact, it's probably fair to suggest that the more polyphony an instrument offers, the less expressive it tends to be


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/may05/articles/leader.htm

Paul White does make a few interesting points here, most of these wouldn´t really be that original either, but I am pretty sure there is a whole lot more to say about this.

Any insights?

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
seraph
Editor
Editor


Joined: Jun 21, 2003
Posts: 12398
Location: Firenze, Italy
Audio files: 33
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 12:14 am    Post subject: Re: Polyphony - less expression? Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Quote:
In fact, it's probably fair to suggest that the more polyphony an instrument offers, the less expressive it tends to be

are you implying that a piano is less expressive than a tin whistle Question I strongly disagree Cool

_________________
homepage - blog - forum - youtube

Quote:
Don't die with your music still in you - Wayne Dyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 1:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I am not. Paul White is saying that. It is however easy to get what he actually means, but this opinion of his is a bit crude isn´t it?
_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
seraph
Editor
Editor


Joined: Jun 21, 2003
Posts: 12398
Location: Firenze, Italy
Audio files: 33
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

crude but not unfathomable Shocked actually I think he could be right Cool a saxophone is more expressive than a pipe organ but 8 inexpressive notes may say more than 1 expressive one, isn't it Question who cares Rolling Eyes
_________________
homepage - blog - forum - youtube

Quote:
Don't die with your music still in you - Wayne Dyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

seraph wrote:
but 8 inexpressive notes may say more than 1 expressive one, isn't it Question


Well, that realy depends; I think one big sustained, modulated note from a expert sax player might bring a tear to your eyes while doing the same on a piano might be harder.

I read that piece too, earlier, and was still considdering posting it. As I pointed out elsewhere, previously; I´ve been giving this matter a lot of thought lately, especially in how it relates to modular synths. I´m not so sure polyphony is inherently a bad thing; certainly chords are a good invention! But I do think that for detailed expression we will need elaborate controll structures and in most (electronic) instruments those aren´t there. Most of the time when I want more elaborate controll structures I grab a modular but the implementation of polyphony in many makes it very hard to adress individual notes in detail. I think that in this field the ease of the interface is often inveresly proportional to how easy it is to do this; for the NM and the G2 it´s quite hard, I happen to know that the Aplied Acoustics people gave the matter some considderation and in Tassman it´s a little easier. For Super Collider and Pure Data you have to specify how you want your polyphony to work and perhaps roll your own making it easier, but of cource those are far less friendly to the novice then the Nords....

It´s a trade off.

Quote:
who cares Rolling Eyes


Well, I don´t realy care about what others feel is the "best" instrument and aparently neither do you, but I do care deeply about putting expression into my own notes! I think it´s worth some thought.

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
seraph
Editor
Editor


Joined: Jun 21, 2003
Posts: 12398
Location: Firenze, Italy
Audio files: 33
G2 patch files: 2

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 8:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Kassen wrote:
I do care deeply about putting expression into my own notes! I think it´s worth some thought.

I do too regardless of the number of notes Very Happy

_________________
homepage - blog - forum - youtube

Quote:
Don't die with your music still in you - Wayne Dyer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 9:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

seraph wrote:

I do too regardless of the number of notes Very Happy


Oh, yes, I´m sure.

I suppose Paul White is more along my lines then along yours on this subject, it might not affect you that much. Still, I think it´s commendable that the editor of a high-profile magazine like S.O.S. is daring to take a public stance like this.

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Paul White has to write his column every month. Very often he goes about his business with too little attention to the details. However, this doesn´t realy matter that much. A leader is kinda supposed to be like that. We aren´t supposed to go out and shoot old ladies after reading his monthly leader.
There is no such thing as polyphony being bad.. or good. Paul White is partly correct but he doesn´t really analyze the issues at hand. As for synths, polyphonic synths aren´t better than the composition, the player and the patches. And if harmonies cannot be expressive I don´t know what is expressive. If there is one single thing that is wrong I propose the polka board presets .. among them those pads.. being the most obvious. All those magnificent presets have taken away the essence of how and why you should mess about with actually making your own timbres that in fact will work well with the music. That said, I don´t see that as a problem at all, at least from what I have heard of music posted at this board. White is talking to the pop pop and rock crowd, not us.
A lot of notes, a multitude of events, doesn´t really mean anything until you dress the construct with timbres and you get a piece of music.
Are polka boards bad? Hardly, and most are pretty awesome synths but most are sugar coated with presets and packaged in order to be impressive wall of sound devices.
Bottom line: I don´t care really. I do what I do, but White is making a few good points but these aren´t really that relevant to this community.
White is overlooking one important point here, and that is that synths are, hopefully, about the patches and a patch is an instrument. If the voice isn´t expressive you can just as well claim that the player hasn´t put together a sensible patch and he also might not be playing it well.

As for timbres, we are still learning from classical music and "modern" orchestral music. In this context, claiming that a lot of notes aren´t expressive doesn´t make much sense. You carefully construct timbres. There will be at least several notes at work at any given time. Shocked

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 18195
Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 211
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 10:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Having spent much of my musical life working on monophonic synthesizers, I would never go back from polyphonic instruments. You can always choose to play a poly synth in mono mode. Still the argument has some validity, but it's pointless to debate this.

I like to play flutelike sounds on my analog synths. Having a mono flute patch is much less expressive than a polyphonic one. Even two voices is better than one. It's not wonder that since Bach's time there are usually 2 flutes, claranets, oboes, bassoons, horns and trumpets. These are expressive instruments to be sure, but two is better than one.

_________________
--Howard
my music and other stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

This might be OT, but one extremely vital component of ensemble music and orchestral music is spatiality. It is easy to forget this these days, but the spatiality of huge orcehstral music is also a part of the music and very often the composer knows what he is doing. And this isn´t expressive because there are too many notes flying around? I don´t think so.
_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
chuck



Joined: Apr 26, 2005
Posts: 58
Location: cincinnati, oh

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Paul White's article is really fine. It touches on a number of very basic things.

A lot of it depends on what we are expecting in terms of expression... what is what makes up musical expression.

I've been to piano concerts and heard people absolutely go nuts over a performance that I found to be only OK. They talked about all kinds of things from expression to tone. Is that possible on piano? Yea, I think so, but I also think it takes a piano player to hear it totally.

What would be your expectation of electric guitar if all you had heard was Charlie Christian or Les Paul? What would you think of Jimi Hentrix? Lou Reed?

Paul White's point about polyphony vs. the expressiveness of a single note instrument could be true. Does that fact that the human voice is monophonic have anything to do with it? The fact is that any monophonic instrument MUST find a way to use that note to hold volumes of information in order to be expressive. Polyphonic (multitimbral) sounds have a different tools for expressiveness. Are we listening for that?

Listening to a Bach fugue and keeping track of all voices is a different listening experience from hearing a solo flute. I've heard string quartet arrangements of Bach fugues with all voices being played 'expressively' and frankly I find it distracting. The expression for that music is in a different place.

Many people I know and work with claim that all forms of electronic music are non-expressive. Do you believe that? If you do, imagine that producing music electronically is a very new element of music history. We have a lot to learn about this medium in order to be expressive, and many people have a lot to learn about listening to order to hear it.

Could Palestrina compose expressive vocal music. Sure. What would he do if his only tool was a modern symphony orchestra (remember that many of the instruments would be new inventions to him). Could he be as expressive with that tool? Not without some practice. What if Josquin was presented with a performance of Mahler 5? Would he really hear the expression?

Yea, its easier to play some instruments expressively... if the expectations out there are ready for what we are doing.

_________________
Never confuse beauty with the things that put your mind at ease.

Charles E. Ives
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 18195
Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 211
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 10:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

chuck wrote:
What if Josquin was presented with a performance of Mahler 5? Would he really hear the expression?


Great question. I submit that he would have immediately thought that Mahler was great. I base this on my personal experience. When I hear some new music I've never heard before and it's great, I get an immediate buzz. The last time this happened to me was when I saw Amy X Neuburg for the first time. Wow, I was instantly knocked out. It didn't take time for me to become familiar with her style and technique.

Sure there would be a lot of new stuff for Josquin to absorb hearing a modern orchestra play Mahler, but I think it would be very exciting for him. He would "get it".

_________________
--Howard
my music and other stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

elektro80 wrote:
We aren´t supposed to go out and shoot old ladies after reading his monthly leader.


You could have said that a little earlier!
I killed twelve myself before I read this.
:¬p

Quote:
There is no such thing as polyphony being bad.. or good.


Well, no, but there are such things as bad controll schemes. I read Paul´s leader to imply that polyphonic instruments are harmed by bad interfaces that hold back their expressiveness as compared to -say- a ensemble of monophonic instruments as large as the amount of polyphony in the polyphonic one.

For example; a 80 key piano will be less expressive then 80 seperately adressed strings (or pairs of strings) for example because in the last case all the voices share only one sustain pedal. In the piano you are also unable to play more then one "a4" at the same time which is a limitation.

Quote:
Paul White is partly correct but he doesn´t really analyze the issues at hand.


Hmmm, I do beleive I analyzed the issues in some depth and I mostly agree with him (except the bit about guitars played in different ways and breath controlers, he realy lost me there). I wrote about these issues previously in the "velocity" thread but that became such a mess that I was very hessitant to post this article after my initial impulse to post it.

Quote:
As for synths, polyphonic synths aren´t better than the composition, the player and the patches.


Indeed, and nobody was claiming that. The problem is that most conventional (mainly commercial and non-modular) synths will possibly be far *worse* then the composer which is a very bad thing. The problem is interface, a restrictive, primitive comunication protocol (midi) where our one hope (polyphonic aftertouch) is generally ommited. A seperate problem that deeply affects this issue is that in modular synths the implementation of polyphony is often cludged in a way where the border of the voice and the border of the instrument become unclear.

This can be fixed, actually one possible fix is quite easy and opens the way to many other things; the answer is to kick out polyphony and implement objects of which multiple paralel instances can be called within a monophonic instrument. That does not inherently solve the interface or comunication elements to this mindbogelingly hard problem, but at least it greatly simplifies possible strategies for solving it.

I pleaded for this in the past.

Quote:
And if harmonies cannot be expressive I don´t know what is expressive.


I think the relative expressivenes of harmonies (or even any tonal use of sound) is very relative to what is to be expressed by whom, however, harmonies and polyphony need not be related at all. Just because synth-manifacturers feel they should be does not mean you need to follow their ideas; there are many, many alternatives and I feel all of those are equally valid as harmonies, they are just harder to come by in most environments.

Aditionally, nobody said harmonies are bad; at least I didn´t and I don´t think Paul meant to say this.

Quote:
If there is one single thing that is wrong I propose the polka board presets .. among them those pads.. being the most obvious. All those magnificent presets have taken away the essence of how and why you should mess about with actually making your own timbres that in fact will work well with the music. That said, I don´t see that as a problem at all, at least from what I have heard of music posted at this board. White is talking to the pop pop and rock crowd, not us.


I´m unaware of the Polka Board or it´s presets so I can´t realy comment on those and I don´t doubt your observations. I do however think that this and closely related matters are amongst the greatest problems in electronic music and quite possibly the most limiting in my own dealings with the synthesisers I use currently.


Quote:
A lot of notes, a multitude of events, doesn´t really mean anything until you dress the construct with timbres and you get a piece of music.
Are polka boards bad? Hardly, and most are pretty awesome synths but most are sugar coated with presets and packaged in order to be impressive wall of sound devices.


Well, yes, but I took the "dressing with timbres" as a given, it´s the controll of the timbres that bothers me.

Quote:
Bottom line: I don´t care really. I do what I do, but White is making a few good points but these aren´t really that relevant to this community.


Well, I respect that you don´t care on this particular issue, but I do think these points are of a tremendous relevance to me and I think that in many people who do not realise the problem this is caused by a improperly conceived standard that influenced what people think of as "given". It might be that indeed this isn´t seen as a contraint but I think the removal of the constraint could be seen as liberating by many.


Quote:
White is overlooking one important point here, and that is that synths are, hopefully, about the patches and a patch is an instrument. If the voice isn´t expressive you can just as well claim that the player hasn´t put together a sensible patch and he also might not be playing it well.


Many instruments are so deeply ingrained in the conventional thinking about intra-instrument polyphony¹ that making the patches I want to make is quite simply impossible with them. That might well be due to my own inexperience but I´m not aware of anybody who has succesfully solved these matters in a non-random way with a interface suitable for realtime use. I can trace the source of the problem directly to the design desisions of the instruments so unless there are things I didn´t think of and which haven´t been documented in any of the texts I read on this subject then I think blaming this on patch designers or Paul´s abilities as a instrumentalist quite unfair. It´s the instrument designers that are to blame and I think it´s very daring of Paul to point out the problem.


Quote:
As for timbres, we are still learning from classical music and "modern" orchestral music. In this context, claiming that a lot of notes aren´t expressive doesn´t make much sense. You carefully construct timbres. There will be at least several notes at work at any given time. Shocked


To me your phrasing here implies that you are disagreeing with something that was said in this thread or in Pauls leader yet I´m unable to find this. Could you clarify? I don´t see the inherent relationship between timbre, classical music and notes; I own and have made many pieces that have no dicernable notes (and most certainly no chords) at all and that still have timbres

To be clear; I want many voices at once, it´s not polyphony in the musical context that I´m opposed to, it´s polyphony within single instruments as it has so far been implemented that I think is a profound and very limiting problem. Even a polyphonic pitchbend controler by itself would be tremendoesly helpfull to me and litterally save me hours per designed sound and minutes per recorded note in those pieces that run into this problem.

In short, as much as I like you, I simply can´t agree on this issue with you.

¹Look, I made a new word!
:¬)

_________________
Kassen

Last edited by Kassen on Mon May 09, 2005 12:20 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

chuck wrote:
Does that fact that the human voice is monophonic have anything to do with it? The fact is that any monophonic instrument MUST find a way to use that note to hold volumes of information in order to be expressive. Polyphonic (multitimbral) sounds have a different tools for expressiveness. Are we listening for that?


Very interesting note.

Quote:

Many people I know and work with claim that all forms of electronic music are non-expressive. Do you believe that? If you do, imagine that producing music electronically is a very new element of music history. We have a lot to learn about this medium in order to be expressive, and many people have a lot to learn about listening to order to hear it.


Quite so. I´ve often thought that electronic music is so young and underdeveloped that we´ve been quite lucky to already have some of the expressive pieces that we have.

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Kassen wrote:
To be clear; I want many voices at once, it´s not polyphony in the musical context that I´m opposed to, it´s polyphony within single instruments as it has so far been implemented that I think is a profound and very limiting problem. Even a polyphonic pitchbend controler by itself would be tremendoesly helpfull to me and litterally save me hours per designed sound and minutes per recorded note in those pieces that run into this problem.


White is stating the obvious, but not really saying anything smart about this at all. I don´t think he is trying to say anything profound either, this is simply about delivering something that is provoking/ interesting and within the deadline.
It is very obvious that hammering away at something like a Triton or what have you doesn´t quite prove there is life on earth. However, claiming polyphonic instruments to be less expressive rather comments on how many are using the instruments and how they are played.. even the composition, rather than saying anything profound about the instruments. Yes, he has a point or two, but so what?
Another matter is that we do see polyphonic synths lacking in how the polyphony is used/controlled. There is obviously something basic missing here.. a grand new concept not yet imagined.
OK, let us say that a piano is less expressive, even embarrasingly so. But is the music played by say Jan Johannson ( like "Visa från Utanmyra" - http://www.nyfac.bibnet.dk/html/nyhed_cd0410.htm ) without expression? Isn´t it moving? So what makes it work? We can make a list.. : the musician + the music + the instrument

That said, I am no big fan of huge dense chords and jazzy gestures. I mentioned in an earlier post that there is much to be learned from classcial music and orchestral music in the way a huge array of various instruments create exciting textures and timbres. Spatiality is a part of this too. I am not saying we should copy Haydn,( god forbid etc etc ) but rather explore what can be done with electronic instruments in an ensemble or orchestral setting. And people here are doing that already, at least in the chamber music end of it.

I don´t think we are disagreeing about the essence here, I simply think that White is stating the obvious while not going anywhere with this. At best some rock keybordist in Wales will read this leader, then buy a secondhand mono synth in order to figure out how those old leads where done back in the 70s.
As for creating polyphonic textures, I pretty much make them from scratch one component voice at the time. That is how I hear them, that is how I write them and that is how I want to have them played. In that sense White might think I am mad because I am overdoing the solo voice thingie a tad.

..Back to the performer and the music. We have a thread here that is called "What is music". It is full of posts that say that music is magical and whatnot. So.. isn´t it then correct to propose that the music transcends the instrument? As for musical performances, it is arrogant to demand aboslutely every performance ever to be excellent and mindblowing. Music is also about taking risks, and there is far more to music than good or bad. What about unsuccessful music? Most musicians have experienced such moments.

Sure, it is a very releveant observation that electronic music is new. This is interesting because we can just as well wish for a new tradition.. a context that creates a framework for writing and listening to the music.. as we can claim the loss of tradition to be liberating. We want both?

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
modulator_esp
Stream Operator


Joined: Feb 04, 2005
Posts: 2844
Location: Nottingham, UK
Audio files: 275
G2 patch files: 1

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I think Paul is basically saying that nowadays, synths that are polyphonic seem to be less capable of expression than synths that are monophonic, mostly due to shortcomings in the keyboard as an expressive interface.

What we really need to overcome this are better controllers for our synths so that each finger playing a note can shape the sound individually, as on a guitar.

Polyphonic aftertouch or alternate controllers anyone?

Unfortunately these things just don't seem to be very marketable as they would require the learning of new techniques.

One advantage that synths have over guitars and saxes etc are that they have much more non-real time expression.

Try getting a noodle out of a guitar Wink

_________________
Jez
music | adventures in sound | gear for sale
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

elektro80 wrote:

White is stating the obvious, but not really saying anything smart about this at all. I don´t think he is trying to say anything profound either, this is simply about delivering something that is provoking/ interesting and within the deadline.


Possible, but it´s the second time he writes about his; it´s a reaction to reactions on his last piece....

Quote:

Yes, he has a point or two, but so what?


Well, I don´t think there is any immediate need to declare the end of the world, but I do think that his points hold enough merrit to warrant some thought about wether we can actively do something with these ideas. Can we get around some of these limitations? What, realy, does "portamento" or "glissando" mean within a polyphonic context?

Quote:

Another matter is that we do see polyphonic synths lacking in how the polyphony is used/controlled. There is obviously something basic missing here.. a grand new concept not yet imagined.


Indeed, this is realy what I wanted to say. Currently something has to give; realtime, instrumentalism, midi; one of those or more will have to go in order to have a proper solution. I think that´s a big deal.

Quote:

That said, I am no big fan of huge dense chords and jazzy gestures. I mentioned in an earlier post that there is much to be learned from classcial music and orchestral music in the way a huge array of various instruments create exciting textures and timbres. Spatiality is a part of this too. I am not saying we should copy Haydn,( god forbid etc etc ) but rather explore what can be done with electronic instruments in an ensemble or orchestral setting. And people here are doing that already, at least in the chamber music end of it.


Oh, yes, I too believe spatiality to be closely related to the use of polyphony, I think this is a matter that´s realy on the border between what the Nords call the "poly" and the "fx" area. Clever use of pan and volume there (for lack of more busses) can be quite effective in this field. I fully agree but here too I think we could benefit tremendously from carefull thought about the nature of polyphony and it´s controll.

Mosc wrote above that he prefers polyphony because he prefes two flutes over one. Well, I too prefer two flutes over one most of the time, but I will sooner take two, nearly indentical, mono-patches since that would make it easier to make use of gliding notes and of cource this would make spatialisation and movement much easier. Also; depending on the piece note stealing and similar matters might affect the end result in hard to controll ways.

Quote:

I don´t think we are disagreeing about the essence here, I simply think that White is stating the obvious while not going anywhere with this. At best some rock keybordist in Wales will read this leader, then buy a secondhand mono synth in order to figure out how those old leads where done back in the 70s.


Well, that and we ourselves are debating this now....

Quote:

As for creating polyphonic textures, I pretty much make them from scratch one component voice at the time. That is how I hear them, that is how I write them and that is how I want to have them played. In that sense White might think I am mad because I am overdoing the solo voice thingie a tad.


Perhaps so, but I do the same. If you listen carefully to "miss" on your I-pod you may notice that at times the emulation of the soundboard glides towards a note before that note is hit by the strings.

I felt programing that and trying to do similar things in a emulated bassguitar sound was harder then it ought to be; for many stringed instruments that´s a perfectly valid musical gesture and the icing on many rock guitar solos. Why wouldn't we have this in polyphonic sounds if we already give many a emulated piano pitchbend and a G2 harpsichord preset reacts to velocity?

I´m not at all in favour of declaring realism dogma, but I do think that MIDI has given us a perspective where we tend to only move away from realism towards a certain abstract standard (which has velocity, pitchbend and modulation under the second wheel) instead of towards imaginary, fairytale instruments or nightmarish contraptions that morph physics.

Perhaps I´m going totally off Paul´s track here.


Quote:
So.. isn´t it then correct to propose that the music transcends the instrument?


Good music does, yes. Sometimes you have music which comes down to a declaration that one has a 808 or that one owns a electric guitar now and if those go beyond the instrument it´s in a social context from the perspective of the musician and perhaps his friends but that´s not one I´m interested in personally. Asuming we want to go beyond the instrument in a more meaningfull way then I think detailed, personalised and intuitive controll of the instrument is a must. We must work within the limitations of the instrument and learn to accept those but we also need to find a instrument that suits our ideas.

I am in full agreement with your other points (that I cut out for readability) in that paragraph, but I think that the monoculture in electronic instrument design is the enemy of these ideas. I feel Paul is right to encourage the design of "alternative" interfaces from this perspective, I also feel that we need to immediately concentrate on how we map various instruments to various controlers in intelligent ways. I applaud the idea behind the Korg Karma, I just think it´s sad you can hardly touch the algorthems and I don´t think it will output post-algorithmic midi.

Quote:

Sure, it is a very releveant observation that electronic music is new. This is interesting because we can just as well wish for a new tradition.. a context that creates a framework for writing and listening to the music.. as we can claim the loss of tradition to be liberating. We want both?


Yes, I think so to various degrees, do you experience those as contradictory?

Good chat, this.

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Kassen
Janitor
Janitor


Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

modulator_esp wrote:

Try getting a noodle out of a guitar Wink


Some composers get quite close to that, actually;
http://malamutant.com/
;¬)

_________________
Kassen
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
blue hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 24075
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 277
G2 patch files: 320

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Kassen wrote:
modulator_esp wrote:

Try getting a noodle out of a guitar ;)


Some composers get quite close to that, actually;
http://malamutant.com/
;¬)


Hmm, I'd think it would require a lot of actuators & mechanics & stuff ...

Jan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Kassen wrote:
Well, I don´t think there is any immediate need to declare the end of the world, but I do think that his points hold enough merrit to warrant some thought about wether we can actively do something with these ideas. Can we get around some of these limitations? What, realy, does "portamento" or "glissando" mean within a polyphonic context?


Yes.. and what can it mean? What we have here are instruments that at best are really great, but they have a predefined interface that really won´t let us get at some of the good stuff. In fact , most of the impressive big synths aren´t really truly great performance instruments for other genres than plain pop and evergreens. However, we can use them to good effect anyway, but it leaves us wanting for something more.. something different.

And yes.. I did notice those details in that tune. Wink


Quote:
Yes, I think so to various degrees, do you experience those as contradictory?


Not really. Within literature and say painting both reliance on/reference to tradition as well as the modernist constuct both work well both within the scope of art creation and art critic. If there is any contradiction I would say that is only a percieved one, not a real one.
Tradition and freedom.. I want them both.. Very Happy

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Blue Hell wrote:
Kassen wrote:
modulator_esp wrote:

Try getting a noodle out of a guitar Wink


Some composers get quite close to that, actually;
http://malamutant.com/
;¬)


Hmm, I'd think it would require a lot of actuators & mechanics & stuff ...

Jan.


Well, I know this guy you see, and he is a total noodle after a bottle of vodka.. and then he goes for his Gibson...

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
blue hell
Site Admin


Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 24075
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 277
G2 patch files: 320

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

elektro80 wrote:


Well, I know this guy you see, and he is a total noodle after a bottle of vodka.. and then he goes for his Gibson...


Right ... I can imagine :-)

Jan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 6:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Laughing
_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ian-s



Joined: Apr 01, 2004
Posts: 2669
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Audio files: 42
G2 patch files: 626

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2005 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Polyphony definitely decreases the expressiveness of a synthesiser, you can hear the effect yourself as you A/B mono and poly mode. Razz

I wonder how an orchestra would sound if all the members played like soloists?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
salo-t



Joined: Feb 28, 2005
Posts: 29
Location: Helsinki,Finland

PostPosted: Tue May 10, 2005 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

modulator_esp wrote:
I think Paul is basically saying that nowadays, synths that are polyphonic seem to be less capable of expression than synths that are monophonic, mostly due to shortcomings in the keyboard as an expressive interface.


Yes, the keyboard is not the best interface for playing really expressive monophonic melodies, one of the reasons is that it doesn't allow to bend notes naturally. The strenght of the keyboard is it's capability for polyphony.
I remember reading Brian Eno talking about that many years ago, lamenting that the synthesizers became associated as keyboard instruments.

BTW, has anyone seen a really good church organist play? I mean one who can play with all four limbs, improvise and change register settings
on the fly like nothing. If that's not expressive, then I dont know what is. It's "polyphonic expression" at it's best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: elektro80
Page 1 of 2 [30 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Goto page: 1, 2 Next
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Discussion » Composition
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Copyright © 2003 through 2009 by electro-music.com - Conditions Of Use