On Oct 11, 2005, at 6:06 PM, Scott Rossi wrote:
I think it's perfectly understandable that the musicians you cite
didn't
want to learn how to program the equipment. I'll wager the
majority of them
wanted to spend their time making music, not learning an arcane
programming
language. And yet that didn't stop many notable artists from
making a name
for themselves and learning how to push music technology.
I think what's involved is a question about what constitutes "making
music" -- a question that was changed by the advent of programmable
synths. For some synth musicians (certainly not all), programming
*is* making music, since it's the texture & character of the patches
that gives the final result much of its noticeability and interest.
It seems to me that "Office"-type applications are not like synths in
this respect. A Whole New Look to office memos is a bad thing,
distracting, not a good thing; memos are not art. If you're a
typographer or graphic designer it's a different story -- but then
you don't use MS Office.
Something like Rev, a programming environment, is half like Office
(as an environment encouraging somewhat standardized work, so you
don't have to *think* about the bookkeeping) and half -- the more
interesting half -- like synths.
IMHO
Charles Hartman
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
