Eleanor Grootoonk
Eleanor Grootoonk
Avik Kumar Maitra
Avik Kumar Maitra
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
"SO FAR, SO GOOD"
STEIM WORKSHOP OVERVIEW
"SO FAR, SO GOOD"
Hideki Kanno & Michael Dotolo
Day 1
The workshop was opened by (the host) Robert van Heuman [http://hardhatarea.com/hatlog/]
He demonstrated various features of Steim's LiSa program.
LiSa is basically an easy-to-use, but not-so-versatile program for live/recorded sampler/looper. It loads sound into a buffer and you adjust (or not adjust) the parameters by which it plays back, e.g. playback indices and rate. Pretty much any possibility specifically relating to looping and sequencing in a live performance has been incorporated.
Day 2
Frank Balde [Steim's software programmer] demonstrated the features and usability of junXion.
JunXion is basically the software that communicate with customized hardware. You can assign the incoming data (midi or OSC) to variables and route them to other programs like LiSa. Like LiSa, JunXion is very easy to use, allowing various 'treatments' (e.g. scaling, routing) for the incoming sensory data. VERY EASY TO USE is the marketing point of both products. However, a couple of things to note are that it runs on OSX or OS9 only, the user interface is not customizable, and they are currently not undergoing further development. However, development ideas are being contemplated. Did I mention that it is very easy to use? You can start making music in about 10 minutes after installation of both products.
junXion and LiSa
http://www.steim.org/steim/products.html
Anne LaBerge ["http://www.annelaberge.com/"] demonstrated the use of her customized interfaces, as well as, organizational techniques for improvisation. She uses Max/Msp for sorting her sensory input (pedals mostly), and she uses a modular analog synthesis software (like PD or MAX) that is included with her processing hardware. Lots of effects in the box. Basically, she is using technology as a means of extending the timbral qualities of her instrument, as well as, give herself a chance of being heard in an electric band. She uses video and messages (via udp in MAX, etc.) as a means of communication with other performers and musicians. In this way, she is able to create a loose improvisational structure.
What I find quite funny is how she has incorporated the arduino into her ensemble-improvasation technique. Basically, she built an interface (a button and a slider) that is connected to the arduino. This is used by the musician so they can control their sound, or the processing of there signal. Also, she has used this interface as a way of introducing democracy in to her organizational techniques, whereby the musician is allowed to vote on which musical motif or section should be played. I asked her what happens if the musician chooses to 'pass' on many of the musical motifs that are suggested. She said, “you have to get rid of those musicians.” I am still waiting for her piece entitled, The Little Problem Called Democracy.
Day 3
Taku Mizuta Lippit {"http://www.djsniff.com/"} provided an overview of Steim's mission objectives and demonstrated his turntable art. Similar to Anne, he considers technology as a means of extending the qualities of his turntable.
In his lecture he focused to show overview of structure for sound making on experimental music field. It was organized systematically that input; physical interface -> processing; exchanging the signal to some information -> assign; connect this information to some function generating sound -> output; playing sound. He also showed a few examples of each part by particular artists works.
The afternoon program continued with Daniel Schorno [http://www.pocketopera.info/]
, who showed us the interfaces he uses and excerpts from his Pocket Opera.
WHY?
Why experimental musicians need these particular musical devices? As one of the reason, they invent their own instruments cause normal musical instruments can not make sound what they want. It is important to consider about Taku's suggestion that "Think every time about why you need your own instrument".
I always wonder how people assess the quality of experimental music, and how experimental musicians prepare particular system to make sound. The sounds generated by their systems are mostly outside of the typical musical element. That is, the typical element is when people feel "it is music" because they are identifiable musical characteristics, such as, melody, harmony and rhythm. These musicians try to escape from established musical rules by using their own system, but at same time they don't throw away all of the musical elements. In the case of the performer, they try, consciously or unconsciously, to extract musical elements from deconstructed systems for reorganizing their own music making. The extracted musical elements are, usually, a fraction of the musical spectrum. The most typical elements used in a performance are more primitive or essential, like dynamics of volume, rhythmic manipulation and variation in density of sonic events.
There is a way to assess these experiments by asking how it is sound can extend the effect of music to the audience. Many of musical instruments are built on the basis of how they function, as a means, of generating sound along musical rules like notes or rhythm. These functions help people to create great music piece, but nowadays this function is also limiting the possibility of creating a new quality of music, or an evolved musical language.
To think how sound can be a component of a musical effect is still a subject for musicians and artists. And, its answer, consequently, is different for each. If artists have already reached their own ideas regarding this subject, then the (previously mentioned) softwares developed in STEIM can be great tools to realize the artist's idea. But each function of STEIM softwares are not quite so new. Unfortunately, there is no stimulation to reach new insight for the artist's own idea. It seems this is why Taku doesn't use STEIM softwares even if he is reminded, everyday, that he should be using them.
"SO FAR, SO GOOD"
Hideki Kanno & Michael Dotolo
Day 1
The workshop was opened by (the host) Robert van Heuman [http://hardhatarea.com/hatlog/]
He demonstrated various features of Steim's LiSa program.
LiSa is basically an easy-to-use, but not-so-versatile program for live/recorded sampler/looper. It loads sound into a buffer and you adjust (or not adjust) the parameters by which it plays back, e.g. playback indices and rate. Pretty much any possibility specifically relating to looping and sequencing in a live performance has been incorporated.
Day 2
Frank Balde [Steim's software programmer] demonstrated the features and usability of junXion.
JunXion is basically the software that communicate with customized hardware. You can assign the incoming data (midi or OSC) to variables and route them to other programs like LiSa. Like LiSa, JunXion is very easy to use, allowing various 'treatments' (e.g. scaling, routing) for the incoming sensory data. VERY EASY TO USE is the marketing point of both products. However, a couple of things to note are that it runs on OSX or OS9 only, the user interface is not customizable, and they are currently not undergoing further development. However, development ideas are being contemplated. Did I mention that it is very easy to use? You can start making music in about 10 minutes after installation of both products.
junXion and LiSa
http://www.steim.org/steim/products.html
Anne LaBerge ["http://www.annelaberge.com/"] demonstrated the use of her customized interfaces, as well as, organizational techniques for improvisation. She uses Max/Msp for sorting her sensory input (pedals mostly), and she uses a modular analog synthesis software (like PD or MAX) that is included with her processing hardware. Lots of effects in the box. Basically, she is using technology as a means of extending the timbral qualities of her instrument, as well as, give herself a chance of being heard in an electric band. She uses video and messages (via udp in MAX, etc.) as a means of communication with other performers and musicians. In this way, she is able to create a loose improvisational structure.
What I find quite funny is how she has incorporated the arduino into her ensemble-improvasation technique. Basically, she built an interface (a button and a slider) that is connected to the arduino. This is used by the musician so they can control their sound, or the processing of there signal. Also, she has used this interface as a way of introducing democracy in to her organizational techniques, whereby the musician is allowed to vote on which musical motif or section should be played. I asked her what happens if the musician chooses to 'pass' on many of the musical motifs that are suggested. She said, “you have to get rid of those musicians.” I am still waiting for her piece entitled, The Little Problem Called Democracy.
Day 3
Taku Mizuta Lippit {"http://www.djsniff.com/"} provided an overview of Steim's mission objectives and demonstrated his turntable art. Similar to Anne, he considers technology as a means of extending the qualities of his turntable.
In his lecture he focused to show overview of structure for sound making on experimental music field. It was organized systematically that input; physical interface -> processing; exchanging the signal to some information -> assign; connect this information to some function generating sound -> output; playing sound. He also showed a few examples of each part by particular artists works.
The afternoon program continued with Daniel Schorno [http://www.pocketopera.info/]
, who showed us the interfaces he uses and excerpts from his Pocket Opera.
WHY?
Why experimental musicians need these particular musical devices? As one of the reason, they invent their own instruments cause normal musical instruments can not make sound what they want. It is important to consider about Taku's suggestion that "Think every time about why you need your own instrument".
I always wonder how people assess the quality of experimental music, and how experimental musicians prepare particular system to make sound. The sounds generated by their systems are mostly outside of the typical musical element. That is, the typical element is when people feel "it is music" because they are identifiable musical characteristics, such as, melody, harmony and rhythm. These musicians try to escape from established musical rules by using their own system, but at same time they don't throw away all of the musical elements. In the case of the performer, they try, consciously or unconsciously, to extract musical elements from deconstructed systems for reorganizing their own music making. The extracted musical elements are, usually, a fraction of the musical spectrum. The most typical elements used in a performance are more primitive or essential, like dynamics of volume, rhythmic manipulation and variation in density of sonic events.
There is a way to assess these experiments by asking how it is sound can extend the effect of music to the audience. Many of musical instruments are built on the basis of how they function, as a means, of generating sound along musical rules like notes or rhythm. These functions help people to create great music piece, but nowadays this function is also limiting the possibility of creating a new quality of music, or an evolved musical language.
To think how sound can be a component of a musical effect is still a subject for musicians and artists. And, its answer, consequently, is different for each. If artists have already reached their own ideas regarding this subject, then the (previously mentioned) softwares developed in STEIM can be great tools to realize the artist's idea. But each function of STEIM softwares are not quite so new. Unfortunately, there is no stimulation to reach new insight for the artist's own idea. It seems this is why Taku doesn't use STEIM softwares even if he is reminded, everyday, that he should be using them.
 | fisherman.mp3 4821K Downloaden |
Monday, May 11, 2009
Semesterdocent Rob van Kranenburg
Rob van Kranenburg werkte van oktober 2007 tot april 2009 bij Waag Society als Programmaleider voor het Domein Samenleving. Twee dagen per week werkt hij als docent, voornamelijk aan kunst- en design academies. Als innovatie consultant houdt hij zich bezig met onderhandelings strategiëen voor nieuwe technologiëen, op dit moment zijn dat ubicomp en rfid (radio frequency identfication). Daarnaast is de relatie tussen het formele en informele binnen economisch en cultureel beleid onderwerp van onderzoek. En hij houdt zich bezig met de voorwaarden voor een duurzame culturele economie.
Rob van Kranenburg studeerde cum laude af in Literatuur Theorie aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. Hij begon met werken bij Professor Ronald Soetaert in Gent, aan de faculteit Onderwijskunde. Daar ontwikkelde hij online leermodules, methoden en concepten met als uitgangsppunt multi-geletterdheid. In 2000 vertrok hij naar Amsterdam om te werken als programmamaker media-educatie in De Balie, centrum voor cultuur en politiek . Daarnaast was hij ook docent en coordinator van het nieuwe media programma aan de UvA, afdeling film- en televisie wetenschappen. Met het gevoel dat het terrein van de nieuwe media eigenlijk te jong is om te historiseren begon hij bij Doors of Perception als co-programmamaker en stelde hij met John Thackara het programma van Doors 7 samen: Flow, the design challenge of pervasive computing. In 2003 was hij mentor bij de postgraduate cursus voor performance, theater en kunst bij APT, Arts, Performance, Theatricality.
Rob van Kranenburg studeerde cum laude af in Literatuur Theorie aan de Universiteit van Tilburg. Hij begon met werken bij Professor Ronald Soetaert in Gent, aan de faculteit Onderwijskunde. Daar ontwikkelde hij online leermodules, methoden en concepten met als uitgangsppunt multi-geletterdheid. In 2000 vertrok hij naar Amsterdam om te werken als programmamaker media-educatie in De Balie, centrum voor cultuur en politiek . Daarnaast was hij ook docent en coordinator van het nieuwe media programma aan de UvA, afdeling film- en televisie wetenschappen. Met het gevoel dat het terrein van de nieuwe media eigenlijk te jong is om te historiseren begon hij bij Doors of Perception als co-programmamaker en stelde hij met John Thackara het programma van Doors 7 samen: Flow, the design challenge of pervasive computing. In 2003 was hij mentor bij de postgraduate cursus voor performance, theater en kunst bij APT, Arts, Performance, Theatricality.
The Internet of Things by Rob van Kranenburg
- By Bruce Sterling
- October 03, 2008 |
- 10:43:35 AM |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)