On 10 Jan 2007, at 14:59, alex wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 13:18 +0000, thor wrote:
>> But do you think there is a difference in that the instrumentalist,
>> when playing
>> with his/her ensamble/group, is extremely concentrated on the music
>> and not on the tool/instrument he/she is using when making the music?
>
> A programming language is a textual language designed for human
> expression, so not that far from other human languages such as
> English.
> Can a novelist concentrate on the novel and not the language they are
> using?
I guess not. Writing is very much "about" language. But when you speak
different languages you're not aware of the language you are speaking
at a given time until you reach a situation where you're lacking the
word
or become unsecure about grammar.
So it seems to me that your analogue is saying that live-coding is
like writing
a novel but playing an acoustic instrument is like speaking.
I suspect you don't like that interpretation : )
>> The performer coding away on the computer has to get into the
>> algorithm
>> and stop concentrating on the music while typing. It seems like an
>> oscillation
>> between being immersed in the music and the abstract machine.
>
> The algorithm is the music!
Isn't it the description of the music? I'd say the ontology of music
is bound
to be as a sound primarily. But ouch, we're into difficult territory
here.
> I think we should aim to be able to enact a thematic change within 3
> seconds of deciding to do it, which might be faster than instrumental
> musicians.
Yes, I agree. That's the aim.
Received on Wed Jan 10 2007 - 15:33:22 GMT