Does our favorite piece of music always evoke the same reactions? Even if we are in the mood for it? What is this piece of music about for us? Was that intended by the artistic composer? That exactly, those nuances of feelings we have even if we listen the same recording/mockup of it all the time? I keep myself asking that when thinking over what music is about, when thinking the composer would have done this because he thought it would fit. Fit me? Fit him? Fit the most? Is dead music nobody listens to still artistically worthwile? Is commercial music not to regard worthwile because we can't justify to see an artistry part in it? It's all the different intentions and emotions that make a piece lively, samples or live, rock or pop as well as symphonic. 

William,

You concluded that my "whole point is that this thread is "disturbing" because it takes music away from live performance."  That wasn't my point at all.   My point - Your conclusion that what you and I do in the digital world is more evolved than what happens in a concert hall is unhelpful to the future of digital music.  

Digital music is a great addition to live music.  But why create separation between the two and take an elitist's position regarding how much more evolved digitial music is from live performance?  You stated "The concert music field is a government-subsidized snob festival that exists mainly as a fashion statement for the rich.", while stating that what you do is more evolved.  Saying digital music is more evolved transfers that snobbery to yourself and devalues your argument. 

What concerns me and makes me write here is that if you decide you are more evolved than those who practice composition in a different form, you are creating a very limited view of the world for yourself and for others you work with.  Regarding live performance you said, "I find it a disgusting and snobbish System whose purpose is to enforce uniformity of thought and obliterate individuality of artistry.", and in the same breath you claim that you have the more evolved art form, which only enforces uniformity of thought and obliterates individuality of artisty by demeaning live performance as a less evolved way of expressing art.  Digital music is the most evolved form of art and anybody involved in live performance is a snob.  Hmmm...what other limitations do you wish to impose on those around you?   Your world will get very small very quickly if you believe yourself to be so above others.

People who see themselves as more evolved than those who came before them stop learning from those who laid the foundation. 

Also, I did not say anything like "digitlal music is cut off from musicians".   Digital musicians and composers are every bit as much a musician as live composers/performers.   What I will say is that if digital composers make the decision that live composers and their medium are less evolved, that they cut themselves off from the best learning environment available to making better digital music.  That was and is my point.  Don't put yourself above others who express their art differently than you do.   It won't help you create better art, just more arrogant art. 

PaulR,

In the winter I practice golf indoors against a wall, with a picture of Ben Hogan's backswing to look at constantly.  :)

Good post, Tanui.  If we see both live performance and digital production as valid art mediums, they are more likely to learn from one another and both will benefit.  If we pit one against the other we'll miss great opportunities to move both of them forward.  They both have very different purposes and very different benefits (economics being one of those for digital music).  Both are clearly better at some things and limited in ways that the other isn't.  We should learn from both, not build walls between them.

I tried not to involve anyone's music in the discussion, but I think it's not avoidable to make the point - Tanuj, as I read it from William's initial post, he meant that we would be there already with samples and perfection, well ok, later on he said almost and in some cases. So the artistry would really come availible for anyone at high quality, and as you say (which I also already mentioned in an earlier post btw.) at affordable prices. And also being affordable for artistry because a single artist can pull of a 80-piece-orchestra and doesn't need 80 or more people and doesn't need 80 times the time needed for just composing and recording the thing.

Yet some of you might have heard of the Lexus show, where 12 Lexus cars where "performing" an orchestral piece. Dunno if composer Chris Nicolaides or orchestrator Alistair King are member of this forum, but both have achievedwhat I regard as a quite well done mockup in advance to recording the LSO with the same piece. I'd recommend to have a listen to that thing, and in the order that you firstly listen to the samples version here: http://www.mailbigfile.com/a8b2d2ce7b835825aa7391866ce6efb9/listFiles.php Then go to the Lexus showcase site http://www.lexusorchestra.co.uk/ and download the recordings from the download section.

I'll not elaborate too much on this as I want you to get your own impression of it first. But too me these are two very different "performances" and I doubt I would call the mockup being perfect, yet there are only a few around with the quality it has. Surely some more tweaking would help it .If you want to follow the original discussion please visit the original VI-Control forums thread: http://vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7041

All the best,

PolarBear 

Actually the Lexus stuff I referred to was to show off the other way around, like William proposed it - having the samples in first place, nothing else would make it to the recording of a top world orchestra. While being great composers and orchestrators, still the artistry is limited to what was captured in samples, let aside the special things VSL offers us already. I didn't intent to pull off another dreaded live vs. samples discussion with this, where people do mockup a 24th variation of existing recordings. They may be an interesting approach to see what's possible, but you will agree that usually one wouldn't spend that much care for every little and smallest detail like if you were to imitate an Itzhak Perlman. And in my opinion that is showed off quite well be the Lexus stuff which was going the other way around - the expressiveness the mockups perhaps could have is almost easily outrun by the recording. A mockup of these recordings would definately soudn different than what was presented for demoing purposes. So for me it's still a no, we're not there with samples yet. We can show off ideas convincingly enough for a fraction of the price. But not the samples nor the artists can create an equally pleasing rendition with samples. And I'm not picking on anyone's abilities here, as I would do a by far inferior job at things like this.

PolarBear

Great recap - thanks.

Here's another recap for you cfblakeman - that's bullshit.

I never said i was "more evolved" - where did I say that? 

Answer a question straight.  Even though that is hard for you since you are from the Classical Mind Control Establishment.

I am less evolved.  By choice.  I spit regularly on people who are evolved.

Just joking. I don't actually spit on anyone.  I would never because I respect all opinions. Even cfblakeman! Sorry, sir.  Just a bit of typical internet hyperbole.

 Any reason for that? Besides people spitting back on you sometimes?

@William said:

Also, I am no longer of any significance to VSL, and so am signing off.