Oh my. [[:|]] [:D]
When will there be demos, Herb? [:)]
When will there be demos, Herb? [:)]
196,808 users have contributed to 43,033 threads and 258,449 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 19 new post(s) and 94 new user(s).
Yes you do. And I feel the same way. If other's want to use them, "knock yourself out". But my line is drawn at any performance locking you into a sequence of notes greater than two.@Nick Batzdorf said:
In all fairness, I have to say I have some of the same feelings Evan has - but I draw the line at a different point. I personally am not interested in *phrases* - meaning that I have nothing against anyone else using whatever works for them; I just don't consider octave runs, trills, grace notes, harp glisses, and repeated notes (i.e. the Repetition tool) to be in that category.
And for runs I can use modes and scales other than 'stock" runs.
I'm not into using sampled performances just because they sound better. I prefer to use the legato instruments to do trills, the dynamic layers to do dynamics, etc.@Nick Batzdorf said:
I do believe in using sampled crescs and dims if they happen to fit. The problem is that you can't control the rate even if the length happens to fit, so I almost always end up going for the 3-lay programs. But when the sampled ones work, they sound better.
Just because it sounds better to use sampled "phrases" doesn't make it right. This has been everyone's argument all along, and yours about "better sounding crescendos" isn't any better.
Evan Evans
Well that's not what I was saying anyway. I have no qualms with your choice, and indeed, I am sure that recorded crescs/dims are highly useable for you (indeed they are useable for me). I was just saying that the idea of using recorded crescendos in place of the MIDI equivalent (dynamic layers with controller input), is not any better in the argument/debate that seems to have stirred from me bringing my opinion of where to draw the line than the original piccolo run example. It is a sampled performance. Of course it's going to sound better using an actual recorded performance. But my theory/philisophy/moral/ethic stance is that if it can be done with MIDI, albeit worse, than that's all that MIDI qualifies you to do, outside of an actual performance. This is just a purist viewpoint, which mainly has to do with preserving the integrity of the art of composition and performance in a world where MIDI is available and in the future other "things" will be available. But as long as a crescendo is controlled than I am all for whatever technology uses it. I guess this comes from a disdain of digital over analog. I am for controlling the performance and not being a slave to it.@Nick Batzdorf said:
Evan, I don't "argue" that anything I do is better or more right than anything else, I'm just saying how I like to work.
I see someone who uses "phrases" similar to a collage artist. Sure there's a place for it and some people buy it, but I think Picasso, Van Gogh, DaVinci, Michelangelo, etc. would be rolling in their graves. I adhere to a level of standards so as to keep the integrity of my predecessors using the same standards preserved. having a respect for that level of the art automatically creates "lines" to be drawn. And for those fighting to preserve such integrity, IT'S A GOOD THING. Although "collage artists" have a built in bias to argue to the otherwise. Even though Picasso, etc knew how to collage just fine, and chose NOT to do it.
Evan Evans