On Jan 29, 2005, at 2:23 PM, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 02:11 PM 01/29/2005, Carl Dershem wrote:
>Aaron Sherber wrote:
>
> > Devil's advocate, for a moment: Why couldn't the musicians left without
>> a gig sharpen *their* computer skills, and use their advanced
>> musicianship to help make sampled or sequenced performances better?
>
>Oh, yeah - that pays so well, pays *off* so well (in terms of
>performance, sharpening your computer skills is a non-issue, unless
>youre a computer performance person), and really benefits a liver
>performance.
Christopher was suggesting (I think) that hand engravers put out of work by computer engravers "put their superior knowledge and professional competencies to excellent use" by learning to do the same thing on a computer. (Apologies if I've misread.) Why is it reasonable to suggest that one group of people apply their skills in another area, but not another group? No one, in any field, is promised available employment for life.
Aaron.
Where the difference is, is that computers have not put engravers out of work (except in the very lowest echelons of publication) to the same extent that sequencers have cut into musicians' jobs. There is not enough work to go around to all the displaced musicians, unlike former hand-copyists and engravers.
Christopher
_______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
