We call free hospitals and school "normality" you call them "a dangerous socialist idea" We call death penality "something against humanity, an awful vindict for barbaric primitive population", you call it "justice". We call music "music" and sound "sound", you call sound "music" and viceversa Old discussion......9V wrote:the difference between europe and USA? We call your wars "wars", you call them "peace missions for democracy and freedom"
It is not weird, it is logic: the midi pattern remains changeable, editable. it remains MUSIC. The mixed down track WAS the music, it "sounds" the same (identical) but it is no more editable with musical parameters (notes, pauses). So it isn't music anymore. You can modify it only with sound parameters (frequency, resonance, delay, compression, volume etc.). It is not so difficult to understand. Unless you believe acoustic and music are the same science, or that the image of yourself in a mirror is you and not just your (identical) image. AND again (above all): you can transform MUSIC into SOUND (that is to say in a sequencer: MIDI to AUDIO), but you cannot transform SOUND into MUSIC (it would be the third revolution, after MIDI and VST... Peter Neubacker tried it with DNA...but it remains a very clever way to interpret phisical elements into musical elements... and, actually, it works only with individual poliphonic instruments, like piano or guitar... and not always).abl385 wrote: Open Live, load an Operator on a MIDI channel and go to the arrangement view. Create a MIDI clip by holding down Cmd+Shift+M if you are on a Mac or Ctrl+Shift+M if on a PC. Draw a pattern and hear it back. This is music. Freeze this channel (no shortcut for this, right-click and there it is) and drag the clip to an audio channel; you have a waveform now. Play it back. This can't be music. Both sound exactly the same, yet one is music and the other is not. Very weird..
you are the fart expert, i guess...crofter wrote:If I fart (which I do on a regular basis)it is sound (and smell)If I record the fart it's still sound but without the smell, I think that's what he's getting at.
This is the point of view of a listener, not of a musician. For a listener it is not important to define what music is. It remains music both "live" and "on a cd, on tv, radio" etc. In a musician's perspective it is important to know the difference. And the difference is simple, in electronic music: MIDI is music, AUDIO is just sound.andydes wrote: So if a recording of a live band isn't music, what about if you watch it live on tv? No? What about if you're in the audience and only hear what's on the pa? Is that ok? How about if they use wireless for mics and guitars?
So a blind person that is not capable of seeing, say, the screen of a computer, can't see any MIDI notes and therefore he cannot edit them. So not only he is blind, but can't hear music either.9V wrote:It is not weird, it is logic: the midi pattern remains changeable, editable. it remains MUSIC. The mixed down track WAS the music, it "sounds" the same (identical) but it is no more editable with musical parameters (notes, pauses). So it isn't music anymore. You can modify it only with sound parameters (frequency, resonance, delay, compression, volume etc.). It is not so difficult to understand. Unless you believe acoustic and music are the same science, or that the image of yourself in a mirror is you and not just your (identical) image. AND again (above all): you can transform MUSIC into SOUND, but you cannot transform SOUND into MUSIC (it would be the third revolution, after MIDI and VST... Peter Neubacker tried it with DNA...but it remains a very clever way to interpret phisical elements into musical elements... and, actually, it works only with individual poliphonic instruments, like piano or guitar... and not always).abl385 wrote: Open Live, load an Operator on a MIDI channel and go to the arrangement view. Create a MIDI clip by holding down Cmd+Shift+M if you are on a Mac or Ctrl+Shift+M if on a PC. Draw a pattern and hear it back. This is music. Freeze this channel (no shortcut for this, right-click and there it is) and drag the clip to an audio channel; you have a waveform now. Play it back. This can't be music. Both sound exactly the same, yet one is music and the other is not. Very weird..
if you are a musician you can listen to music in a more profound way, understandig all the elements, etc. If you are a naive listener you just have pleasure from music, because of the intimate brain correspondence with chemical reaction due to math ratios of intervals and rhythm (like when you have pleasure on rollercoasters etc. It is something phisical, not intellectual).andydes wrote:So you're saying that you can never listen to music, only make it? As soon as the sound leaves the instrument, person or computer it's just sound?
And why is this distinction important again?
blind musicians read braille written music with hands. It is difficult, of course, but not impossible. Music is not only readable, it is editable. Blind musicians can edit music, because music is a language. I doubt they "edit sound" to make music, since it is a nonsense. When you edit sound you are not a musician, you are a sound engineer.abl385 wrote: So a blind person that is not capable of seeing, say, the screen of a computer, can't see any MIDI notes and therefore he cannot edit them. So not only he is blind, but can't hear music either.
here in italy "musician" stands for "composer", not for "performer" or "listener"andydes wrote:Everyone takes different things when listening to music. My mate who is a drummer, focuses on the beat. Another friend who djs always concentrates on the overall structure and transitions. Other people listen mainly to lyrics. I tend to think most about how individual elements fit together. But I don't think any of these is more valid than another.
Stop trying to impose your Italian bullshit on the rest of the world, Mussolini tried that and look what happened to him.9V wrote:here in italy "musician" stands for "composer", not for "performer" or "listener"andydes wrote:Everyone takes different things when listening to music. My mate who is a drummer, focuses on the beat. Another friend who djs always concentrates on the overall structure and transitions. Other people listen mainly to lyrics. I tend to think most about how individual elements fit together. But I don't think any of these is more valid than another.