> On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 09:47 +1000, Andrew Sorensen wrote:
>> What expressive power are you talking about if the end-result doesn't
>> matter? Why produce music/visuals at all if you don't care what it
>> looks/sounds like? You might as well live code - a random number
>> generator!
>
> I think end results matter, but with live coded performance the means of
> production are part of the end results. You can record some aspects of
> a live performance but not the whole experience of being there. The
> furrowed look on the performers face is an important part of the
> experience.
>
> Also with live coding the generator (the code) and the 'end
> results' (the output, e.g. the sound) are simply different
> representations of the same thing (the music).
>
> IMHO the audience is better off perceiving the music via the sound
> rather than via the code though.
To me, this highlights a problem with the code.
One of the reasons I spent some time looking at forms of code which go
beyond the static ascii page is to make it more connected with the 'end
result'. I think it's important to find ways of presenting programming
which are clear and readable by a lay audience (I know I'm in the minority
with this view).
I now think that this objective makes livecoding better for the performer
too.
cheers,
dave
Received on Fri Feb 22 2008 - 10:23:05 GMT