Today in section we listened to the piece "Pendlerdrom" by Barry Truax. It was a very different experience to listen to one song without thinking about anything else for 12 full minutes, something I am unaccustomed to since I stopped performing (and listening to ) jazz music several years ago.
It was most interesting with this piece because it changed so much over the length of the piece. At the beginning, I know the composition was artificial, with cuts being faded in and out and layered over and over, but the piece actually sounded like sitting in a train station.
I then really enjoyed how the piece slowly moved form this starting point, and through the train station, also moving more and more towards more abstract sounds of trains and crowds. At one point, I felt like I could actually hear the train accelerating on the track and moving through the tunnels, although the sounds sounded their most abstract at this point as well.
I was very glad we took the time in class to listen to this piece. It was very interesting and I do not know if I would have absorbed the same amount from it if I had just take a cursory listen. Obvious evidence as to how I will hopefully listen to the rest of the selections before the end of class.
Showing posts with label music. Show all posts
Showing posts with label music. Show all posts
Monday, April 14, 2008
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Concert Review II
Last night I attended my second concert. It wasn't a strict technosonics concert, but was instead a traditional performed a full set, half of the time with the accompaniment of a synthesizer, and half without. The band was "Quite my dear," and the played at the Bridge Progressive right off the downtown mall.
I was interested to do a comparison of the two "versions" of the band because I was skeptical as to much of a difference the introduction of digital sounds to their instrumental sound would make. I was surprised at how wrong I was.
First off, and I imagine this helped significantly, the band was very good. The two guitarist/vocalists knew what they were doing and could play off each other very well. The Bassist was very good at covering both melodic and rhythmic structures. The drummer, however was something else. He was very impressive, one of the best amateur drummers I have seen since I used to attend state jazz competitions in high school. His ability to take the sounds of the drums where he wanted, while still keeping time and providing a base for the rest of the band was delightful to watch and listen to.
The second thing that impressed me about these gentlemen was the fact that all of their music was written by them: no covers but no simple elementary melodies either.
Now, there straight instrumental music was very good, very straight forward and almost "pure" I would say. It was easy to listen to, and simple fun. While the music was still lighthearted and fun with the addition of the synthesizer, a welcome level of complexity was added.
The synthesizer was used for several different purposes. It was used for an introduction to one piece featuring the sounds of the wind and whooshing noises. For another, it was used for a sine-sounding keyboard instrument.
Through all its use, the synth player (one of the Guitar/vocalists) did a great job of mixing the very different sound of the synthesizer into the rest of the band's composition. Even as it was adding another, very different layer of tonality and texture, it wasn't overlapping or overpowering what was continuing with the bass, the guitar, the vocals or the drum pattern.
Now, the layer of complexity that the instrument added was not just one from another instrument. It was largely because of the significant contrast between the digital and technological sounds coming from the synth, versus the acoustic/electric sounds coming from the rest of the band.
The one criticism I had of the performance, and this was unfortunately especially critical during their acoustic/digital pieces, was their sound levels. The performance venue was not prime for a concert, it was basically a small concrete room. As such, it was hard at times to hear the more delicate parts of the vocals, guitar or synth selections without having them drowned out by the more rhythmic parts of the band's playing.
Overall, I was very impressed by the music. I walked away from the concert especially impressed with how even a subtle introduction of digital music can add such delightful maturity and complexity to a live performance.
I was interested to do a comparison of the two "versions" of the band because I was skeptical as to much of a difference the introduction of digital sounds to their instrumental sound would make. I was surprised at how wrong I was.
First off, and I imagine this helped significantly, the band was very good. The two guitarist/vocalists knew what they were doing and could play off each other very well. The Bassist was very good at covering both melodic and rhythmic structures. The drummer, however was something else. He was very impressive, one of the best amateur drummers I have seen since I used to attend state jazz competitions in high school. His ability to take the sounds of the drums where he wanted, while still keeping time and providing a base for the rest of the band was delightful to watch and listen to.
The second thing that impressed me about these gentlemen was the fact that all of their music was written by them: no covers but no simple elementary melodies either.
Now, there straight instrumental music was very good, very straight forward and almost "pure" I would say. It was easy to listen to, and simple fun. While the music was still lighthearted and fun with the addition of the synthesizer, a welcome level of complexity was added.
The synthesizer was used for several different purposes. It was used for an introduction to one piece featuring the sounds of the wind and whooshing noises. For another, it was used for a sine-sounding keyboard instrument.
Through all its use, the synth player (one of the Guitar/vocalists) did a great job of mixing the very different sound of the synthesizer into the rest of the band's composition. Even as it was adding another, very different layer of tonality and texture, it wasn't overlapping or overpowering what was continuing with the bass, the guitar, the vocals or the drum pattern.
Now, the layer of complexity that the instrument added was not just one from another instrument. It was largely because of the significant contrast between the digital and technological sounds coming from the synth, versus the acoustic/electric sounds coming from the rest of the band.
The one criticism I had of the performance, and this was unfortunately especially critical during their acoustic/digital pieces, was their sound levels. The performance venue was not prime for a concert, it was basically a small concrete room. As such, it was hard at times to hear the more delicate parts of the vocals, guitar or synth selections without having them drowned out by the more rhythmic parts of the band's playing.
Overall, I was very impressed by the music. I walked away from the concert especially impressed with how even a subtle introduction of digital music can add such delightful maturity and complexity to a live performance.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Student Review: The Beats of Maria Tchijov
For my review I looked at the 10 beats and the beat composition for my friend in our class, Maria Tchijov.
I started off by listening to her composition itself. I enjoyed much of the individual beats, and especially the way she seemed to be exploring the sounds as the piece progressed. However, I think I liked her beats better than her overall composition. While the piece was very interesting, it felt like it simply moved through a list of sound files, adding some and then subtracting some. It didn't feel as layered or as temporally as complex as I would have liked.
One thing I did like was how she layed different beat patterns together. This can be especially heard around the 7 second mark. Here we have three beats, her base beat and two more rhythms built on top of this. The top two seem intentionally out of sync with the base, and as they continue for several repitions, they seperate themselves. This reminded me of the several examples we have seen in class of polytemporal experimentation, or the natural slight difference in sounds making its difference heard over time.
The beats more than made up for these small distractions though. Not only the sounds themselves, but how she used them in her final piece - slicing and recombining them at a minute level to make different sounds even out of the 10 basic beats she had at her disposal.
My favorite beat was by far Beat 5 - it sounds almost like a small metallic marble being dropped onto a hard surface and bouncing once. I really thought the sound was unique, and I really liked how she used it in her composition, splicing several of them together to make a trio of bouncing balls.
I also was really impressed the simplicity and versatility of Beat 7. This - I believe - is the beat Maria used as the base rhythm for her composition. It was reminiscent of a snare in some ways - a small, short, brief little hit with little reverb or echo. But at the same time, it felt more hollow than a snare hit or any other sort of drum. It almost felt like it was only defined by its start and finish - the middle, as short as it was, was irrelevant. Again, I really enjoyed how she used this small basic unit to make the underlying rhythm, a series of a series of varied repetitions of this one sound.
For her more unusual beats, I particularly enjoyed Beats 8 and 9. Beat 8 sounds to me like a stone moving across a table - a nice, slow grating noise. I thought it was particularly neat because although a beat, it conveys a definite sense of movement even in one instance, whereas most of her other sounds conveyed stopping or starting, but only suggested action with repetition. Beat 9 was similar in that it was a little longer, but as the beat ends it feels like it as coming to some form of close. It doesn't sound like movement, or perhaps movement that is coming to a wall or the edge of the table and stopping. Really, this sound mostly reminds me of a frog's ribbit - I am very curious as to how she was able to make this sound, and what software she used.
Overall I was very impressed. I wish there had been a little more complex layering and perhaps even repition of certain beats used multiple times in her composition, but perhaps she was trying to showcase the wonderful diversity and creativity of her beats, which she more than accomplished.
I started off by listening to her composition itself. I enjoyed much of the individual beats, and especially the way she seemed to be exploring the sounds as the piece progressed. However, I think I liked her beats better than her overall composition. While the piece was very interesting, it felt like it simply moved through a list of sound files, adding some and then subtracting some. It didn't feel as layered or as temporally as complex as I would have liked.
One thing I did like was how she layed different beat patterns together. This can be especially heard around the 7 second mark. Here we have three beats, her base beat and two more rhythms built on top of this. The top two seem intentionally out of sync with the base, and as they continue for several repitions, they seperate themselves. This reminded me of the several examples we have seen in class of polytemporal experimentation, or the natural slight difference in sounds making its difference heard over time.
The beats more than made up for these small distractions though. Not only the sounds themselves, but how she used them in her final piece - slicing and recombining them at a minute level to make different sounds even out of the 10 basic beats she had at her disposal.
My favorite beat was by far Beat 5 - it sounds almost like a small metallic marble being dropped onto a hard surface and bouncing once. I really thought the sound was unique, and I really liked how she used it in her composition, splicing several of them together to make a trio of bouncing balls.
I also was really impressed the simplicity and versatility of Beat 7. This - I believe - is the beat Maria used as the base rhythm for her composition. It was reminiscent of a snare in some ways - a small, short, brief little hit with little reverb or echo. But at the same time, it felt more hollow than a snare hit or any other sort of drum. It almost felt like it was only defined by its start and finish - the middle, as short as it was, was irrelevant. Again, I really enjoyed how she used this small basic unit to make the underlying rhythm, a series of a series of varied repetitions of this one sound.
For her more unusual beats, I particularly enjoyed Beats 8 and 9. Beat 8 sounds to me like a stone moving across a table - a nice, slow grating noise. I thought it was particularly neat because although a beat, it conveys a definite sense of movement even in one instance, whereas most of her other sounds conveyed stopping or starting, but only suggested action with repetition. Beat 9 was similar in that it was a little longer, but as the beat ends it feels like it as coming to some form of close. It doesn't sound like movement, or perhaps movement that is coming to a wall or the edge of the table and stopping. Really, this sound mostly reminds me of a frog's ribbit - I am very curious as to how she was able to make this sound, and what software she used.
Overall I was very impressed. I wish there had been a little more complex layering and perhaps even repition of certain beats used multiple times in her composition, but perhaps she was trying to showcase the wonderful diversity and creativity of her beats, which she more than accomplished.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Rainy Day Clouds
So the clouds assignment is wrecking my mind. I have always defined. music by it being at least EITHER melodic or rhythmic, and hopefully both. So to create something that fits in neither category is definitely creating a challenge for me.
Part of my difficulty is coming from the fact that clouds to me is that I am used to plotting out my pieces based on some sort of plan or theme, and I feel like any plan or theme I use will impose either tonality or rhythm on the piece. I am experimenting with trying to overcome this two ways. In a couple of my cloud pieces I am deliberately trying to do less plotting, and focus more time on pulling together parts of more improvisational selections I make using the patches for MSP.
The other technique I am trying is to take the plotting i do and abstract the organization another layer, so single beats or notes are not organized, but so that sections are, even as they fade and flow into each other. Hope it works!
Part of my difficulty is coming from the fact that clouds to me is that I am used to plotting out my pieces based on some sort of plan or theme, and I feel like any plan or theme I use will impose either tonality or rhythm on the piece. I am experimenting with trying to overcome this two ways. In a couple of my cloud pieces I am deliberately trying to do less plotting, and focus more time on pulling together parts of more improvisational selections I make using the patches for MSP.
The other technique I am trying is to take the plotting i do and abstract the organization another layer, so single beats or notes are not organized, but so that sections are, even as they fade and flow into each other. Hope it works!
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Video killed the Radio Star
So I am very excited about the work my group will be doing for the final performance. I think that many who come to the final will hopefully be able to appreciate the concert better because of the work we do as the visualization group.
Our main plan as it stands is to try and get as many cameras as possible in the amphitheater trained on performers, technicians and just the regular students at their laptops. I think there will be so much data and action going on at once, every moment of the production, that I think the visualization will be a great way to focus everyone on one area of what's going on.
I'm sure this might change before the final production, but I am definitely looking forward to our work.
Our main plan as it stands is to try and get as many cameras as possible in the amphitheater trained on performers, technicians and just the regular students at their laptops. I think there will be so much data and action going on at once, every moment of the production, that I think the visualization will be a great way to focus everyone on one area of what's going on.
I'm sure this might change before the final production, but I am definitely looking forward to our work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)