<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bassoforte</title>
	<atom:link href="http://glyphpress.com/talk/2010/bassoforte/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://glyphpress.com/talk/2010/bassoforte/</link>
	<description>the alien writing of designer joshua a.c. newman</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 17:24:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: joshua</title>
		<link>http://glyphpress.com/talk/2010/bassoforte/comment-page-1/#comment-6267</link>
		<dc:creator>joshua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 22:43:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://glyphpress.com/talk/?p=1665#comment-6267</guid>
		<description>Well, a more complete understanding of your medium will make you make better art. That&#039;s undeniable. You&#039;re going to make better stuff if you know what the limits and strengths of your medium are.

Painting is a great example. You &lt;em&gt;are &lt;/em&gt; a better painter when you learn how paints work. It&#039;s relatively recently that paints have been available commercially. Before that, artists blended their own. They got precisely the paints they needed because they learned how to produce certain qualities. The question in my mind is: should you therefore not experiment with tools that you don&#039;t understand completely? I think the answer is pretty clearly that you &lt;em&gt;should&lt;/em&gt; because that&#039;s the only way to approach a more complete understanding. You gotta start somewhere.

So, maybe it&#039;s a crutch, but if that&#039;s the way you learn to walk, then awesome.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, a more complete understanding of your medium will make you make better art. That&#8217;s undeniable. You&#8217;re going to make better stuff if you know what the limits and strengths of your medium are.</p>
<p>Painting is a great example. You <em>are </em> a better painter when you learn how paints work. It&#8217;s relatively recently that paints have been available commercially. Before that, artists blended their own. They got precisely the paints they needed because they learned how to produce certain qualities. The question in my mind is: should you therefore not experiment with tools that you don&#8217;t understand completely? I think the answer is pretty clearly that you <em>should</em> because that&#8217;s the only way to approach a more complete understanding. You gotta start somewhere.</p>
<p>So, maybe it&#8217;s a crutch, but if that&#8217;s the way you learn to walk, then awesome.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://glyphpress.com/talk/2010/bassoforte/comment-page-1/#comment-6266</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:49:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://glyphpress.com/talk/?p=1665#comment-6266</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know how pencils and paints are made any more than wacom tablets and computers.  But I can use them as tools to make art.

That being said an understanding _might_ help you make better art.  The famous misquote actually goes &quot;the proof of the pudding is in the tasting.&quot;  So when you look at things that are good, you just _might_ find people who know their tools better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know how pencils and paints are made any more than wacom tablets and computers.  But I can use them as tools to make art.</p>
<p>That being said an understanding _might_ help you make better art.  The famous misquote actually goes &#8220;the proof of the pudding is in the tasting.&#8221;  So when you look at things that are good, you just _might_ find people who know their tools better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: joshua</title>
		<link>http://glyphpress.com/talk/2010/bassoforte/comment-page-1/#comment-6259</link>
		<dc:creator>joshua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 02:51:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://glyphpress.com/talk/?p=1665#comment-6259</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know how much he knows! I&#039;d argue that most people who play guitar don&#039;t know what&#039;s going on to make music, though, either. I think there&#039;s a good chance, though, that this guy knows how software works. He&#039;s obviously skilled, and has an extensive credit list on his site, talking about the different craftspeople who made it.

The falsifiable (and clearly false) null hypothesis is that people who &lt;em&gt;do&lt;/em&gt; know how computers work, and make music with them, are more capable for that knowledge. 

In the end, yes, it&#039;s a tool, and knowing more about how it works makes one able to use it closer to its limits. But I think live looping (for instance) is not only legitimate musically, but can be actually interesting.

(... and is often boring, but I&#039;ve seen plenty of boring live performances that didn&#039;t use digital flams and scams, as well, and I&#039;m sure you have, too.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know how much he knows! I&#8217;d argue that most people who play guitar don&#8217;t know what&#8217;s going on to make music, though, either. I think there&#8217;s a good chance, though, that this guy knows how software works. He&#8217;s obviously skilled, and has an extensive credit list on his site, talking about the different craftspeople who made it.</p>
<p>The falsifiable (and clearly false) null hypothesis is that people who <em>do</em> know how computers work, and make music with them, are more capable for that knowledge. </p>
<p>In the end, yes, it&#8217;s a tool, and knowing more about how it works makes one able to use it closer to its limits. But I think live looping (for instance) is not only legitimate musically, but can be actually interesting.</p>
<p>(&#8230; and is often boring, but I&#8217;ve seen plenty of boring live performances that didn&#8217;t use digital flams and scams, as well, and I&#8217;m sure you have, too.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Freed</title>
		<link>http://glyphpress.com/talk/2010/bassoforte/comment-page-1/#comment-6258</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Freed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 01:14:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://glyphpress.com/talk/?p=1665#comment-6258</guid>
		<description>I love the instrument.

Unfortunately I am becoming frustrated by musicians using Laptop multi-tracking and sequencing programs. Especially live. I guess I can say this because I used to use one. I recognize their power and flexibility but ultimately I think they, ironically, limit creativity. I also think that there should be a basic understanding of the science behind the instrument that the musician plays. To exaggerate to make a point, an acoustical guitar player knows that tightening the strings too tight will make them snap because of too much tension. Also the guitar player knows that his/her instrument is made out of some sort of wood (or maybe composite). 
The guy in the video clearly is very knowledgeable about his instrument. He made it!! But could he tell us about the Laptop? How does the Hard Drive store the audio? How did the programs get written? I feel that computers, especially for music are a crutch. Yeah you made art. But did you REALLY know how it was made. Did you write that code? Or did the computer do it for you?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I love the instrument.</p>
<p>Unfortunately I am becoming frustrated by musicians using Laptop multi-tracking and sequencing programs. Especially live. I guess I can say this because I used to use one. I recognize their power and flexibility but ultimately I think they, ironically, limit creativity. I also think that there should be a basic understanding of the science behind the instrument that the musician plays. To exaggerate to make a point, an acoustical guitar player knows that tightening the strings too tight will make them snap because of too much tension. Also the guitar player knows that his/her instrument is made out of some sort of wood (or maybe composite).<br />
The guy in the video clearly is very knowledgeable about his instrument. He made it!! But could he tell us about the Laptop? How does the Hard Drive store the audio? How did the programs get written? I feel that computers, especially for music are a crutch. Yeah you made art. But did you REALLY know how it was made. Did you write that code? Or did the computer do it for you?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carrie</title>
		<link>http://glyphpress.com/talk/2010/bassoforte/comment-page-1/#comment-6254</link>
		<dc:creator>Carrie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jun 2010 05:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://glyphpress.com/talk/?p=1665#comment-6254</guid>
		<description>oh beautiful. The only thing wrong with this is his facial hair.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oh beautiful. The only thing wrong with this is his facial hair.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

