From: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org (idealcopy-digest) To: idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Subject: idealcopy-digest V3 #355 Reply-To: idealcopy@smoe.org Sender: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-idealcopy-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk idealcopy-digest Monday, November 27 2000 Volume 03 : Number 355 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: [idealcopy] computer lessons ["giluz" ] RE: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! ["giluz" Subject: RE: [idealcopy] computer lessons > quick question from someone not too up on this game , i suspect i > may not be > alone in this. if you had something on audio cassette and wanted > to convert > it to a digital format , what's the best way? as well as for this music > project , i also have a vague idea of compiling a cd but a lot of > the things > i intend to put on it (he says vaguely) are on tape or vinyl. can someone > point me in the right direction pse.... p > Well - you'd have to plug your tape into your soundcard's audio input and record it to your computer (using even the simplest player with recording abilities would do it). Just note that when you are recording, you'd have to tell your recording application which audio format to use (WAV/AIFF) and which sampling rate and bit rate (a 16 bit / 44.1k sampling rate stereo file is the standard). The only problem you'd have is the noise ratio of the sound card, which could affect the quality of the recording (i.e. add more noise to the original). cheers, giluz ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 12:02:58 +0200 From: "giluz" Subject: RE: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! > i do like the sound of this, although it's a quite different concept than > what i had proposed to the group. what is described above leaves > little or > nothing to chance. I do agree with Mark's attitude, and I really don't understand why it leaves so little to chance. It just does it differently. What you're describing is something in which, if we put it on a sort of an imaginary timeline, everyone does their thing at the same time, without knowing what the other one's doing, and then someone assembles it. Mark is talking about something which is on the one hand more linear, because each track changes as it passes through another member, who treats it as he may and then passes it further on, and on the other hand has far more possibilities for parallel different versions: Let's say I do something and post it via the net. Someone else, let's say Mark, takes the same track and manipulates it in a way that now the track is absolutely different. Now you have two tracks which are completely different. Graeme, let's say, may prefer Mark's track to mine and choose to continue working on it, or he can choose to combine both or work on them seperately, as two different songs, and so on. Now, you can call it whatever you like, but you can't say there's hardly any coincidence in this kind of creative process. I'll definitely go for that kind of working process, especially since I've done this sort of thing before (at a much smaller scale, of course). >For the > whole perversity of it, I would recommend that if the > jam approach is taken by some, that its length is > exactly three and a half minutes, so to create the > ultimate anti-pop song under the same time format! I thought it was only 3:00 minutes - wow, things have certainly changed in the last few years, maybe the pop industry finally matured and realised that a 3 minutes long length could not be time enough for making a serious statement, so they added 30 seconds to it - fucking brilliant! Who was the executive genius who figured that out? giluz ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 11:45:14 -0600 From: "squonk" Subject: Re: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! [Eardrumbuz] perfecto! - ----- Original Message ----- From: "idealcopy-digest" To: Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 3:30 AM Subject: idealcopy-digest V3 #354 > i love that! another reason why i wanted to attempt 3 pieces. the 40 mixes of > a 1:54 tribute to our boys, the 3:30 anti-pop number, and the > ambiantnoiseextravaganza of say somewhere in the 11-18 minute range ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 11:45:14 -0600 From: "squonk" Subject: Re: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! [Eardrumbuz] perfecto! - ----- Original Message ----- From: "idealcopy-digest" To: Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 3:30 AM Subject: idealcopy-digest V3 #354 > i love that! another reason why i wanted to attempt 3 pieces. the 40 mixes of > a 1:54 tribute to our boys, the 3:30 anti-pop number, and the > ambiantnoiseextravaganza of say somewhere in the 11-18 minute range ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 23:34:31 EST From: Eardrumbuz@aol.com Subject: Re: RE: [idealcopy] List Members unite whether musician or not!!! In a message dated 11/26/0 5:57:29 AM, giluz@nettalk.com writes: >I do agree with Mark's attitude, and I really don't understand why it leaves >so little to chance. It just does it differently. What you're describing >is >something in which, if we put it on a sort of an imaginary timeline, >everyone does their thing at the same time, without knowing what the other >one's doing, and then someone assembles it. exactly :o) mark's idea involves very deliberate steps towards making music with a sort of library of recorded tracks, while mine is a total chance operation, the only structure being the time frame in which the sounds are to occur. again, i like mark's idea. it's just different from what i proposed, that's all. i'm hoping to get some people who are interested in my recording project, in particular one person who will do the assembling since my equipment is falling apart :o( so, what is everyone thinking on all this? maybe we could get an idea of how much/little we can all contribute. i'm still unsure how i'll get a digital recording of my stuff to everyone. - -paul c.d. ------------------------------ End of idealcopy-digest V3 #355 *******************************