Oh Jay wrote:
Rick Jansen wrote :
Why would that be ridiculous? I was in a Turkish restaurant the other day, where they play live music ...
What I mean to say here is: take some music that at first glance has nothing to do with music we discuss here, and find elements that are quite alike. I'm sure you'll find something that Brahms has in common with The Beatles. Would you think the "Ave Maria" (Schuberts version) has any Kraftwerk connection? Well, I think Schubert may have used a human sequencer here, playing the same little piano melody, repeated over and over.
[ ... ]
All classic musical instruments are synthesizers of a kind too, guitars don't grow on trees. (Heh, who said this?) ...
am i the only one on this list , to whom this message above doesn't make ANY sense @ all ??? :-o sorry , but i really don't get it , rick !!! :-/
Now you know how I feel about your messages :-) It was about "why "music is organized noise" & a song is a song & not a track" and why Brahms-Beatles-Stockhausen-Kraftwerk comparisons may be quite valid. DO pay attention, will you dear? Jan Rocho a ecrive:
No, they are not. I think this doesn't really make sense ... have to agree with Oh_Jay. But you can really use some old instruments or even non-instruments to make sounds. Like Kraftwerk did in "Metal On Metal". But that doesn't make everything a synth.
Of course a guitar is a synthesizer. It has a tone source (string), filtering and sound colouring (the body), a distinctive way the amplitude of the sound develops. It's just that the parameters are more or less fixed, unless you're Jimi Hendrix. Rick Jansen __ rja@euronet.nl http://www.euronet.nl/~rja ____________________________________________ S&H's a module and s&h's looking good